From: "ron minnich" <rminnich@gmail.com>
To: "Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs" <9fans@9fans.net>
Subject: Re: [9fans] directly opening Plan9 devices
Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2009 21:13:27 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <13426df10901072113w182f2322q64d75553a8df6802@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <18c1a2bdb1b9f3c1f9d23182387b5dd6@coraid.com>
On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 9:16 AM, erik quanstrom <quanstro@coraid.com> wrote:
> On Wed Jan 7 11:58:04 EST 2009, rminnich@gmail.com wrote:
>> The underlying assumption of motivation for this discussion is that
>> jailing (or whatever we want to call it) is somehow a good thing.
>> Given that every CPU we care about comes with virtualization hardware,
>> I just can't see the point of jails -- seems like an idea whose time
>> has gone, kind of like 8086 segments.
>>
>> If we give up on using RFNOMNT as a jailing mechanism, do the concerns
>> really make any sense?
>>
>> ron
>
> arm has virtualization?
Some do.
ARMs are so cheap ... don't jail things, just get another one.
ron
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-01-08 5:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 43+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-01-03 21:44 Roman V. Shaposhnik
2009-01-03 21:46 ` erik quanstrom
2009-01-03 21:56 ` Roman V. Shaposhnik
2009-01-03 22:03 ` erik quanstrom
2009-01-03 22:40 ` Roman V. Shaposhnik
2009-01-03 22:46 ` Francisco J Ballesteros
2009-01-03 22:56 ` erik quanstrom
2009-01-04 5:00 ` Roman V. Shaposhnik
2009-01-04 5:40 ` erik quanstrom
2009-01-04 4:58 ` Roman V. Shaposhnik
2009-01-03 22:57 ` erik quanstrom
2009-01-03 23:15 ` Russ Cox
2009-01-03 23:17 ` erik quanstrom
2009-01-04 5:07 ` Roman V. Shaposhnik
2009-01-04 5:05 ` Roman V. Shaposhnik
2009-01-03 22:21 ` Francisco J Ballesteros
2009-01-03 22:40 ` erik quanstrom
2009-01-04 5:12 ` Roman V. Shaposhnik
2009-01-04 5:27 ` erik quanstrom
2009-01-04 5:39 ` lucio
2009-01-04 5:42 ` erik quanstrom
2009-01-05 0:52 ` Roman V. Shaposhnik
2009-01-05 6:21 ` Roman Zhukov
2009-01-05 11:00 ` Charles Forsyth
2009-01-06 5:02 ` Roman Shaposhnik
2009-01-06 14:17 ` erik quanstrom
2009-01-07 16:55 ` ron minnich
2009-01-07 17:16 ` erik quanstrom
2009-01-08 5:13 ` ron minnich [this message]
2009-01-08 13:37 ` erik quanstrom
2009-01-08 14:03 ` Charles Forsyth
2009-01-08 15:36 ` ron minnich
2009-01-08 15:44 ` erik quanstrom
2009-01-08 17:34 ` Roman V. Shaposhnik
2009-01-08 17:35 ` Charles Forsyth
2009-01-08 7:45 ` Dave Eckhardt
2009-01-08 17:43 ` Roman V. Shaposhnik
2009-01-08 23:30 ` Roman V. Shaposhnik
2009-01-04 7:01 ` Russ Cox
2009-01-04 11:41 ` lucio
2009-01-04 13:01 ` Uriel
2009-01-04 13:16 ` lucio
2009-01-05 0:41 ` Roman V. Shaposhnik
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=13426df10901072113w182f2322q64d75553a8df6802@mail.gmail.com \
--to=rminnich@gmail.com \
--cc=9fans@9fans.net \
/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).