On Tue, 2009-01-20 at 12:07 +0900, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote: > On Mon, 19 Jan 2009 17:52:36 -0800 > Paul Menage <menage@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: <snip> > > Would it make sense to allow a class of subsystem that explicitly has > > no state (or at least, has no state that has a global meaning on the > > machine), so that it can be multiply-mounted? > > > multilply-mounted means its own hierachy can be created per mount point ? I suspect that's what Paul meant -- multiple, distinct instances of the subsystem could be mounted. > If so, signal subsystem can be used instead of noop. Agreed. Cheers, -Matt Helsley _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
