From: Hubertus Franke (frankeh_at_watson.ibm.com)
Date: Sat 08 Nov 2003 - 00:52:15 GMT
Hubertus Franke wrote:
> Rik van Riel wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 7 Nov 2003, Chandra Seetharaman wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> But, integrating CKRM and vserver might not add more value and provide
>>> unneccessary burden for somebody that want sees value in only one of
>>> them.
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> Comments anybody ?
>>>
>>
>>
>> Agreed. CKRM and vserver are orthogonal.
>>
>> Extremely useful together, but still orthogonal ;)
>>
>>
>>
> Yipp, there is also no need to change the syscall number, there will
> be always collisions on
> work in progress. Anybody consolidating such work can make the simple
> change themselves.
>
> For integration, our highest priority now is to get a complete version
> out.
> Chandra nicely cleaned up the intial CKRM interfaces and provides a
> good documentation
> on how the system and components work together.
> So everybody should take a look at that.
> This is the time we need the feedback on these interfaces.
> I'll go in over the weekend and put up a new page on
> http://ckrm.sf.net for this phase
> so that the patches and documentation are readily available for
> download....
>
> Next will be to move the existing schedulers over one by one to get to
> the complete solution..
>
>
> -- Hubertus
>
>
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.Net email sponsored by: ApacheCon 2003,
> 16-19 November in Las Vegas. Learn firsthand the latest
> developments in Apache, PHP, Perl, XML, Java, MySQL,
> WebDAV, and more! http://www.apachecon.com/
> _______________________________________________
> ckrm-tech mailing list
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ckrm-tech
>
Actually I got to take back the syscall number. I checked in test8 and
the vserver number is already allocated....
_______________________________________________
Vserver mailing list
Vserver_at_list.linux-vserver.org
http://list.linux-vserver.org/mailman/listinfo/vserver