sorry that i'm answering so late but:
http://people.linux-vserver.org/~harry/_README_
(it's called readme for a reason ;))
but it's solved now nonetheless ;)
On Wed, 2008-05-14 at 08:52 +0100, Ed W wrote:
> vitalyb wrote:
> >
> >> The description is incorrect in the sense that it implies it only
> >> works one way, but in fact it appears to work both ways, ie the
> >> parent can't see the chrooted process either (or perhaps this is a bug?)
> >
> > AFAIU, since vserver is a kind of chroot itself when above is 'y'
> > it appears to be two different chroots - so they can not see each
> > other.
> >
>
>
> Agreed - I guess the point is that I was expecting chroots to be
> recusive downwards - whereas the statement is correct if we assume that
> chroots are a flat separate space. It would be useful for them to be
> enclosures downwards with the parent always able to control child, but
> not vice versa, but hey
>
> Thanks again
>
> Ed W
-- harry aka Rik Bobbaers K.U.Leuven - LUDIT -=- Tel: +32 485 52 71 50 Rik_at_enzoverder.be -=- http://harry.enzoverder.be Disclaimer: http://www.kuleuven.be/cwis/email_disclaimer.htmReceived on Wed May 14 11:29:40 2008