Fedora Ring 0 definition

[Brendan Conoboy]

On 09/14/2015 11:40 PM, Miroslav Suchy wrote:
> Dne 14.9.2015 v 23:10 Brendan Conoboy napsal(a):
>>> /Then/ we could start thinking about /truly minimal/ concepts,
>>> perhaps  “container minimal” = “the minimal set needed to start and
>>> run an executable dependent on Fedora ABI” (e.g. kernel version
>>> requirement +glibc+locale data+Python 3 interpreter+…, useful for
>>> building containers), “VM minimal” could be “the minimal contents of a
>>> VM needed to start and run…” (e.g. kernel
>>> implementation+init+container minimal, useful for single-app VM), “CLI
>>> minimal”, …
>>>       Mirek
>>
>> Right, so I don't think minimal is the end goal, I think the OS (not the
>> distribution) is the end goal- minimal is presumably a subset of the OS.
>
> And how we call this "truly minimal concept"? Ring -1?
>
> I would like to have those Rings zero based, where zero is absolute
> minimum to run. Somewhere. Not necessary on bare metal.
> The whole "OS" can be Ring 1. There is still plenty of numbers remaining.

How is this useful?

-- 
Brendan Conoboy / RHEL Development Coordinator / Red Hat, Inc.