From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261454AbVFVP1x (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Jun 2005 11:27:53 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261504AbVFVP1x (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Jun 2005 11:27:53 -0400 Received: from gprs189-60.eurotel.cz ([160.218.189.60]:23179 "EHLO amd.ucw.cz") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261454AbVFVPI6 (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Jun 2005 11:08:58 -0400 Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2005 17:08:39 +0200 From: Pavel Machek To: Eric Van Hensbergen Cc: Miklos Szeredi , akpm@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: -mm -> 2.6.13 merge status (fuse) Message-ID: <20050622150839.GB1881@elf.ucw.cz> References: <20050620235458.5b437274.akpm@osdl.org> <20050621142820.GC2015@openzaurus.ucw.cz> <20050621220619.GC2815@elf.ucw.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Warning: Reading this can be dangerous to your mental health. User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi! > > > An emotional argument again. What's "strange" about it? > > > > Not so emotional argument... > > > > System where users can mount their own filesystems should not be > > called "Unix" any more. It introduces new mechanism, similar to > > ptrace. > > I think that's a rather severe statement. I don't see allowing user > mounts damaging standard UNIX system semantics as long as certain > rules are followed. After all, user-mounts and private name spaces > are what the original authors of UNIX went on to develop. Well, but notice how it is called "Plan 9", not "Unix" :-). The "certain rules" are rather tricky to enforce... btw any ideas how Plan 9 solves problems around user-mounts? Does it allow it at all? Pavel -- teflon -- maybe it is a trademark, but it should not be.