From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sun, 25 Feb 2001 16:58:12 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sun, 25 Feb 2001 16:58:02 -0500 Received: from lsb-catv-1-p021.vtxnet.ch ([212.147.5.21]:2829 "EHLO almesberger.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sun, 25 Feb 2001 16:57:55 -0500 Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 22:57:50 +0100 From: Werner Almesberger To: Alexander Viro Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH][CFT] per-process namespaces for Linux Message-ID: <20010225225750.B19635@almesberger.net> In-Reply-To: <3A99569F.98C64B29@storm.ca> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: ; from viro@math.psu.edu on Sun, Feb 25, 2001 at 02:13:04PM -0500 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Alexander Viro wrote: > No kludges actually needed. "Simplified boot sequence" _is_ simplified - > we overmount the "final" root over ramfs. Initially empty. So you have > the normal environment when you load ramdisk, etc. So is this the Holy Grail, err, union mount we've discussed about one year ago ? I.e. stat foo # output A mount /dev/whatever / stat foo # output B with A != B ? If yes, is there also a way to destroy/empty ramfs after this ? - Werner -- _________________________________________________________________________ / Werner Almesberger, ICA, EPFL, CH Werner.Almesberger@epfl.ch / /_IN_N_032__Tel_+41_21_693_6621__Fax_+41_21_693_6610_____________________/