On Mon, 1 Oct 2007, Pavel Emelyanov wrote: > Robert P. J. Day wrote: > > On Thu, 27 Sep 2007, Cedric Le Goater wrote: > > > >>> diff --git a/include/linux/user_namespace.h > >>> b/include/linux/user_namespace.h > >>> index b5f41d4..dda160c 100644 > >>> --- a/include/linux/user_namespace.h > >>> +++ b/include/linux/user_namespace.h > >>> @@ -17,7 +17,7 @@ struct user_namespace { > >>> > >>> extern struct user_namespace init_user_ns; > >>> > >>> -#ifdef CONFIG_USER_NS > >>> +#ifdef CONFIG_NAMESPACES_EXPERIMENTAL > > > > is it really a good precedent to introduce Kconfig variables that > > literally include the word "EXPERIMENTAL"? > > How else can we call it? I proposed one config option for each > namespace with "depends on EXPERIMENTAL" dependency, but everyone > else said that two options are much better.
i don't know -- perhaps something as trivially obvious as NAMESPACES_V2 or something. i just think it's awkward to take a word like "EXPERIMENTAL" that already has a long and established history, and start jamming it into config variable names. but it's just an observation. rday -- ======================================================================== Robert P. J. Day Linux Consulting, Training and Annoying Kernel Pedantry Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA http://crashcourse.ca ======================================================================== - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/