Re: How secure would chrooted ssh be?
From: /dev/rob0 (rob0_at_gmx.co.uk)
Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 16:44:19 -0800
In article <email@example.com>, Tim Haynes wrote:
> There are two other systems for virtualising linux, that come with
> little/no performance overhead. First, ctx/vserver patches - see
Thanks for these pointers. I may try them out myself.
> importantly, the site above has a paper with graph of performance of
> VMware, UML and Xeno for a variety of tasks (standard machine performance
I was quite shocked to see the relative standing of UML, often worse
than VMware! I've not tried VMware myself, but I expected it to have
much greater overhead than UML.
BTW I did try the UML on the P166 as mentioned previously, and it felt
sluggish (as one might expect.)
-- /dev/rob0 - preferred_email=i$((28*28+28))@softhome.net or put "not-spam" or "/dev/rob0" in Subject header to reply