About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view Attachment view

From: Ivo De Decker (ivo_at_zeus.rug.ac.be)
Date: Fri 29 Nov 2002 - 10:27:30 GMT


On Fri, Nov 29, 2002 at 09:44:38AM +0100, Herbert Poetzl wrote:
> I guess there are a lot of loose ends ...
>
> - kbuild kernel config (to enable/disable/configure)
> - per server virtual memory limits
> - quota/device handling (within servers)
> - permission issues (like the chmod 0000 /vservers)
>
> etc,etc ...
>
> these issues are not realized by vserver people,
> because they want the stuff to work (so more tolerance)
> but what would the typical linux user think?

If the vserver patch is to be merged into the mainstream kernel, it should not
be presented as an 'all-in-one' solution, but as a small individual patches.
The vserver patch has many different parts, which are not directly releated:
immutable_link, ipv4root, ctx could all be submitted separately. Some of the
other changes (eg the 0000 anti-chroot-escape hack) are not essential for the
rest of the code. Discussion about those changed should be separated.

Greetings,

Ivo De Decker


About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view Attachment view
[Next/Previous Months] [Main vserver Project Homepage] [Howto Subscribe/Unsubscribe] [Paul Sladen's vserver stuff]
Generated on Fri 29 Nov 2002 - 11:46:06 GMT by hypermail 2.1.3