Re: [PATCH 0/2] resource control file system - aka containers on top of nsproxy!

Srivatsa Vaddagiri
2007-03-07T17:54:25Z

On Wed, Mar 07, 2007 at 11:43:46AM -0600, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> I still think the complaint was about terminology, not implementation.

I don't think that is what http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/2/12/426 conveyed!

> They just didn't want you calling them containers.

Yes that too.

> > Anyway, summarizing on "why nsproxy", the main point (I think) is about
> > using existing abstraction in the kernel.

s/abstraction/"implementation detail" then :)

> But nsproxy is not an abstraction, it's an implementation
> detail/optimization.

--
Regards,
vatsa