On 3/7/07, Sam Vilain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Sorry, I didn't realise I was talking with somebody qualified enough to speak on behalf of the Generally Established Principles of Computer Science.
I made sure to check http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Namespace http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Namespace_%28computer_science%29 when this argument started ... :-)
This is the classic terminology problem between substance and function. ie, some things share characteristics but does that mean they are the same thing?
Aren't you arguing my side here? My point is that what I'm trying to add with "containers" (or whatever name we end up using) can't easily be subsumed into the "namespace" concept, and you're arguing that they should go into nsproxy because they share some characteristics.
Look, I already agreed in the earlier thread that the term "namespace" was being stretched beyond belief, yet instead of trying to be useful about this you still insist on calling this sub-system specific stuff the "container",
Uh, no. I'm trying to call a *grouping* of processes a container.
and then go screaming that I am wrong and you are right on terminology.
Actually I asked if you/Eric had better suggestions. Paul - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
