From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S264253AbTDWULH (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Apr 2003 16:11:07 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S264262AbTDWULG (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Apr 2003 16:11:06 -0400 Received: from carisma.slowglass.com ([195.224.96.167]:4109 "EHLO phoenix.infradead.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S264253AbTDWUKB (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Apr 2003 16:10:01 -0400 Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 21:22:08 +0100 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Mika Kukkonen Cc: LKML , cgl_discussion@osdl.org Subject: Re: [cgl_discussion] Re: OSDL CGL-WG draft specs available for review Message-ID: <20030423212208.B7383@infradead.org> Mail-Followup-To: Christoph Hellwig , Mika Kukkonen , LKML , cgl_discussion@osdl.org References: <1051044403.1384.44.camel@miku-t21-redhat.koti> <20030423174958.A2603@infradead.org> <1051122743.7515.97.camel@miku-t21-redhat.koti> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i In-Reply-To: <1051122743.7515.97.camel@miku-t21-redhat.koti>; from mika@osdl.org on Wed, Apr 23, 2003 at 11:32:25AM -0700 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Apr 23, 2003 at 11:32:25AM -0700, Mika Kukkonen wrote: > On Wed, 2003-04-23 at 09:49, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > > 4.10 Force unmount (2) 2 Experimental Availability Core > (...) > > This is very hard to get right. What the expermintel implementation > > you're referring to? > > This feature was mentioned in v1.1 spec, so some distributions already > provide "experimental" versions of this feature. There are no Open > Source projects I know of, though. How do they provide "experimental" versions of this feature? I don't see how this can be done without major fileystem surgery, so it kindof must be an OSS implementation.. > > Without really big kernel changes it's hard to get full POSIX thread > > semantics. e.g. we still don't have credential sharing for tasks. And > > it doesn't lool like this makes 2.6. I'd rather remove this one.. > > Ah, we are not aiming to get our features into a certain kernel version, > and actually we do not expect or even want (because of 2.6 > stabilization) that our v2 spec kernel features get merged into 2.6 at > this point of time (some of them might, though). > > For us it is enough that the distros will pick most of the features > after v2 specs get released and through that adaption some of > those features will get merged into 2.7 or whatever is coming after 2.6. > So we are not in hurry ;-) Well, this is not doable ontop of any existing kernel without major suregery (introducing a credential cache and passing it down to every place that's doing uid/gid based access control). So none of the CGL distros can really support that.