linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
To: Michael Kerrisk <mtk-manpages@gmx.net>
Cc: akpm@osdl.org, ebiederm@xmission.com,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, janak@us.ibm.com,
	viro@ftp.linux.org.uk, hch@lst.de, ak@muc.de, paulus@samba.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] unshare: Cleanup up the sys_unshare interface before we are committed.
Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2006 15:57:05 -0800 (PST)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0603161555210.3618@g5.osdl.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <26439.1142552064@www064.gmx.net>



On Fri, 17 Mar 2006, Michael Kerrisk wrote:
> > 
> > My personal opinion is that having a different set of flags is more 
> > confusing 
> 
> How is it confusing?  And who is it confusing for?

It's confusing because
 - it's just more flags to keep track of
 - it's all the same issues that clone() has
 - it's an opportunity for future incoherence

> It will potentially require kernel developers to think for just 
> a moment about what is going on.  But why care about them -- 
> they don't have to *use* this interface; userland programmers do.

All the confusion is equally a userland issue, don't try to just enforce 
your own opinions as somehow being "facts" by repeating them over and over 
again.

			Linus

  reply	other threads:[~2006-03-16 23:57 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <1359.1142546753@www064.gmx.net>
2006-03-16 23:34 ` [PATCH] unshare: Cleanup up the sys_unshare interface before we are committed Michael Kerrisk
2006-03-16 23:57   ` Linus Torvalds [this message]
2006-03-17  1:11     ` Michael Kerrisk
2006-03-17  5:42       ` Linus Torvalds
2006-03-17 16:04         ` Eric W. Biederman
2006-03-17 16:49           ` Janak Desai
2006-03-17 20:27         ` Michael Kerrisk
2006-03-18 18:41         ` Eric W. Biederman
2006-03-18 19:54           ` Janak Desai
2006-03-19 13:58             ` Eric W. Biederman
2006-03-18 23:41           ` Paul Mackerras
2006-03-20  4:45 Albert Cahalan
2006-03-20 16:52 ` Eric W. Biederman
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2006-03-16 16:49 Eric W. Biederman
2006-03-16 19:40 ` Michael Kerrisk
2006-03-16 20:33 ` Andrew Morton
2006-03-16 20:41   ` Linus Torvalds
2006-03-16 21:58     ` Eric W. Biederman
2006-03-16 22:19       ` Andrew Morton
2006-03-16 21:36   ` Janak Desai

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=Pine.LNX.4.64.0603161555210.3618@g5.osdl.org \
    --to=torvalds@osdl.org \
    --cc=ak@muc.de \
    --cc=akpm@osdl.org \
    --cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
    --cc=hch@lst.de \
    --cc=janak@us.ibm.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mtk-manpages@gmx.net \
    --cc=paulus@samba.org \
    --cc=viro@ftp.linux.org.uk \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).