From: Joel P. <joe...@mi...> - 2005-10-22 11:05:05
|
I've now played around a bit more with different ways of booting UML, and I've successfully booted with root both on hostfs and on nfs. For practical reasons, the hostfs approach seems to require less arcane configuration options, but on the other hand, the nfs approach doesn't require running as root in order to have different users. Any further thoughts on the relative pros and cons of the different approaches? // Joel |
From: Blaisorblade <bla...@ya...> - 2005-10-22 11:31:17
|
On Saturday 22 October 2005 13:04, Joel Palmius wrote: > I've now played around a bit more with different ways of booting UML, and > I've successfully booted with root both on hostfs and on nfs. > For practical reasons, the hostfs approach seems to require less arcane > configuration options, but on the other hand, the nfs approach doesn't > require running as root in order to have different users. > Any further thoughts on the relative pros and cons of the different > approaches? Speed: nfs Stability: nfs Running a UML as root: I always keep forgetting to detect the situation and add a "Insult_user_for_this()!" call. Btw, a process running as root can't even be chrooted (see man 2 chroot). IOW, call it "unsupported configuration". We'll have humfs soon, we hope, which voids the requirement "running as root", but not yet. However, there are the patches on Jeff Dike's incrementals page. -- Inform me of my mistakes, so I can keep imitating Homer Simpson's "Doh!". Paolo Giarrusso, aka Blaisorblade (Skype ID "PaoloGiarrusso", ICQ 215621894) http://www.user-mode-linux.org/~blaisorblade ___________________________________ Yahoo! Mail: gratis 1GB per i messaggi e allegati da 10MB http://mail.yahoo.it |