Quoting Oren Laadan (orenl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx): > > > Serge E. Hallyn wrote: > > This should let us get rid of some ifdefed code and reduce > > chances for bad config combinations. There's really no reason > > to support it. > > I disagree. > > You are right that this will reduce the changes of bad config > combinations. > > However, it will also introduce some restrictions on the kernel > config which are unnecessary. Some people may not want to have > all namespaces configured. Why? The only reason right now to disable namespaces is for kernel size. > Note that the namespaces are independent in the sense that we > don't need to test all combination of all namespaces - instead, > I consider turning on/off one at a time to be safe enough. And do you do that? :) It still gets more complicated bc you have things like sysvipc and posix mq which both can allow ipc_ns. > (FWIW, is it because you only wanted to show a point that you > only remove UTS_NS ifdefs ?) It was just right there in my face... Anyway if you don't take this patch then the UTS_NS code I removed should have 'name' put under ifdef to avoid a build warning. -serge _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
