On Tue, Jan 06, 2015 at 11:11:49AM -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> No. An empty pid namespace is valid. An empty pid namespace is one
> in which an init process has not entered the pid namespace, or one in
but if I create a PID namespace (unshare/clone) then then I'm the init
process.... how I can create empty PID namespace (from userspace)?
> which the init process has exited (and thus no more processes are
> allowed).
yes, this makes sense
> So an empty pid namespace is a little weird but valid.
>
> The implementation details of the patch completely baffle me. I can't
> see a reason for things being implemented with clone for example.
Yes, this part of the patch is strange, but I like the basic idea
of the patch -- so make it possible to create an empty namespace and
then later enter by nsenter.
Karel
--
Karel Zak <kzak@xxxxxxxxxx>
http://karelzak.blogspot.com
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe util-linux" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
