Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@xxxxxxx> writes: > Yes, this is an alternative. Maybe, I will say something stupid but IMO > the "maycheckpoint" will depends on what you assume you have for the CR: > 1) the container is instantiated in one step, that is > clone(mycloneflags) and that's all, any other clone/unshare is > forbidden. In this case, you can concentrate the code in the nsproxy > structure. > 2) the container can be instantiated in several steps, that is > several clone/unshare but with different namespaces. In this case, you > have to take care of all the namespaces and do a "maycheckpoint" for > each of them. Please excuse me for jumping in late. unshare/clone are irrelevant. Think passing of file descriptors in unix domain sockets. Eric _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
