From: Herbert Poetzl (herbert_at_13thfloor.at)
Date: Wed 17 Dec 2003 - 10:03:52 GMT
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 02:17:29AM -0500, Allen Parker wrote:
> [root$c3]::proc> ls -l
> total 0
[proc listing zapped]
> dr-xr-xr-x 2 root root 0 Dec 17 15:13 virtual
> Am I missing something from /proc? I'm running 2.4.23-vs1.3.0
hmm, guess no, why do you think so?
> Also: what happened to that make your own reboot device howto?
hmm, what do you need a reboot device for, if there
is a userspace helper interface which is activated
on 'reboot' ...
(by the way, a detailed description was on the
mailing list, as this was first introduced a
few weeks ago)
best,
Herbert
> Thanks.
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Herbert Poetzl [mailto:herbert_at_13thfloor.at]
> > Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2003 6:37 PM
> > To: Allen Parker
> > Cc: vserver_at_list.linux-vserver.org
> > Subject: Re: [Vserver] Traffic control
> >
> > On Tue, Dec 16, 2003 at 02:25:59PM -0500, Allen Parker wrote:
> >
> > [utterly important info zapped]
> >
> > > > > How hard would it be to backport the freevps /proc/vservers
> > > > > to "our" vs1.XX?
> > > >
> > > > hmm, for Alex (or Say) I guess, it wouldn't be too
> > > > hard to do that, for somebody not so intimate with
> > > > that code, such a port (I refuse to use the phrase
> > > > 'backport' for 2.4.18-RH -> 2.4.23 ports ;) wouln't
> > > > be that easy ... but nevertheless doable ...
> > >
> > > I'd say that I really like the /proc/vservers idea as
> > > a way to control them (with faux /dev/initctl etc run
> > > through a /proc interface on the host machine).
> >
> > well, have a look at vs1.3.0 or the kernel 2.6 hack, it
> > is at least a beginning ...
> >
> > > With some fakies I'm sure this project could make virtuozzo
> > > look like an overpriced piece of junk (even though it's
> > > that already :-p)
> >
> > keep the ideas coming ... describe them in technicolor
> > and we have something to talk about ... I'm all ears ;)
> >
> > best,
> > Herbert
> >
> > > > > I think it'd be nice to be able to have these features
> > > > > while still running a recent kernel (not 2.4.18)
> > > > > anybody else think so too?
> > > >
> > > > yup, I think so too, and either the virtual network
> > > > concept I am working on, or the next generation of
> > > > the linux-vserver code will do such things, although
> > > > they don't have top priority, as key can easily be
> > > > solved by other means ...
> > > >
> > > > http://www.paul.sladen.org/vserver/faq/#bandwidth
> > > > (this could also be included in vserver start/stop)
> > > >
> > > > HTH,
> > > > Herbert
> > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > Vserver mailing list
> > > > > Vserver_at_list.linux-vserver.org
> > > > > http://list.linux-vserver.org/mailman/listinfo/vserver
_______________________________________________
Vserver mailing list
Vserver_at_list.linux-vserver.org
http://list.linux-vserver.org/mailman/listinfo/vserver