linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/7] containers (V7): Generic Process Containers

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 12 Feb 2007 15:18:20 -0800
From:	"Paul Menage" <menage@...gle.com>
To:	"Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@...ibm.com>
Cc:	"Sam Vilain" <sam@...ain.net>, akpm@...l.org, pj@....com,
	sekharan@...ibm.com, dev@...ru, xemul@...ru, vatsa@...ibm.com,
	ebiederm@...ssion.com, containers@...ts.osdl.org,
	winget@...gle.com, rohitseth@...gle.com,
	ckrm-tech@...ts.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] containers (V7): Generic Process Containers

On 2/12/07, Serge E. Hallyn <serue@...ibm.com> wrote:
>
> Well it's an unfortunate conflict, but I don't see where we have any
> standing to make Paul change his terminology  :)

I have no huge problem with changing my terminology in the interest of
wider adoption. "Container" seems like an appropriate name for the
abstraction, and possibly more appropriate than for a virtual server,
but if it was decreed that the only thing stopping the container patch
being merged was that it should be called, say, "Process Sets", I
would happily s/container/pset/g across the entire patchset.

Paul
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/