From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from phicode.de ([136.243.147.240]) by ewsd; Thu Jan 23 17:42:08 EST 2020
Comment: DomainKeys? See http://domainkeys.sourceforge.net/
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
  s=default; d=phicode.de;
  b=S2TLfNAQh2aD1m1qFX2bodpUwCbFZ9uE6L6p/jfv0S17cEQRvDh5p1C2cnPG8GApbMNC+mg0YbUp9MYsPiX4Fk3BS9PrXk+x8ROQWvUqSpyR2r1cqk3ZC4AOwNiq7vpSyo+TO1r6E6aTSiMTDQVYcmuEVkRBDEMzxzmaURLaLQM=;
  h=Received:Received:Date:From:To:Subject:In-Reply-To:Message-ID:References:User-Agent:MIME-Version:Content-Type;
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=phicode.de; h=date:from:to
	:subject:in-reply-to:message-id:references:mime-version
	:content-type; s=default; bh=KVjzNowXrBxXSWkjXR/CKwet8D8=; b=Ufr
	vrrEMjyd9WXN9k8DOA++eetAF+APEekL6xqiR9AFHHjt0Kv/qHsR9SjM4x5Ojn+S
	HU6vWSyqhI0VzPlypmzwBtgjwTBNam+b+Q6K1H6e7vEyEyPKywZ1oRdgcANJJwsc
	+v98Cn1VqLzmkhyA2gZxxbY1RQSMV4BEORrpbGEI=
Received: (qmail 12888 invoked from network); 23 Jan 2020 22:42:05 -0000
Received: from localhost (127.0.0.1)
  by localhost with SMTP; 23 Jan 2020 22:42:05 -0000
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2020 23:42:04 +0100 (CET)
From: Julius Schmidt <aiju@phicode.de>
To: 9front@9front.org
Subject: Re: [9front] rio wishlists
In-Reply-To: <CAFSF3XPayqyfwbX-QPhYP6SM+S=VuaN=rk1uk=j4b58=Epsrqw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.LNX.2.00.2001232337530.7981@phi>
References: <5c2e3e1c-99a4-4caf-9ab4-615035aec1f8@www.fastmail.com> <EFC0BF3379A3C032D5568E0E5CB5D3A1@a-b.xyz> <CAHjwAuz4a-+om6cXazWhQnVLHjCuh5rY73zN2Y0SsStgHojZgQ@mail.gmail.com> <f4e58d5cca0ecd34@orthanc.ca> <a92cb1f0-de96-46ae-bb97-27136874d390@www.fastmail.com>
 <CAFSF3XPZrfGxjRZ9JHArvir2tPXoDfvKtK_Ua_7ETrSjGm4CXg@mail.gmail.com> <f13fad75-4ac3-4110-a96b-e74e3dfcab75@www.fastmail.com> <CAFSF3XMCqvXicsGjtotMwih4GC2HHTQg0ha5ZSL5wFVkuYNtYQ@mail.gmail.com> <fa1bd66a-a917-4a87-8a2b-d91c3bb95c73@www.fastmail.com>
 <CAK0pxsHVpyae1+teTSOAFp=nBoq_r7-aKexh_X=hEDe7hUcReA@mail.gmail.com> <CAK0pxsFDk=C_+37tKzU=U-TMQLTPcW6MOQ1sgKNBrYhWrj4Bwg@mail.gmail.com> <CAK0pxsF=ehcajz3F1+0BwBM1+csDhXBFZDFb1KskRAydheH1aA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAFSF3XPayqyfwbX-QPhYP6SM+S=VuaN=rk1uk=j4b58=Epsrqw@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (LNX 1167 2008-08-23)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
List-ID: <9front.9front.org>
List-Help: <http://lists.9front.org>
X-Glyph: ➈
X-Bullshit: ISO-certified managed lifecycle grid 

One mechanism would be turn the namespace into a tree of commands, which 
can then be shared only partially.
For instance, /dev could be a node in the tree which is shared among 
most/all programs.

Another approach would be to give mount/bind commands a number indicating 
priority, but I don't have a clear picture how that would work.

On Thu, 23 Jan 2020, hiro wrote:

> eekee: /srv and /shr never felt right to me either. they are not
> orthogonal at all.
>
> does everybody understand what i mean with higher granularity
> namespace sharing? it might be non-obvious if you don't know the linux
> mount namespaces and their features.
>
> i might be all wrong about this, but then i still would like to see a
> more generalized mechanism that is self-similar and orthogonal to
> everything else.
>