[lxc-devel] lxc-simple: porcelain over lxc commands

[Nigel McNie]

On 6 April 2011 23:01, Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano at free.fr> wrote:

> On 04/03/2011 11:14 AM, Nigel McNie wrote:
>
>> Hi List,
>>
>> <snip>
>
>
> Nigel,
>
> Thanks a lot, that's a great work and it is exactly what I was hoping
> someone will do.
> I will be happy to take upstream these new commands.
>
> A mindless remark, I would prefer to rename the "lxc restart" to "lxc
> reboot" to not collide with the checkpoint/restart when it will be
> implemented.
>
> I suspect some modifications will be necessary to polish the code but it
> does no matter as we can take it upstream and do the polishing work after
> this merge.
>
> It will be necessary to check the dependencies with "configure" and be able
> to disable the porcelain commands for the embedded systems, but it is not a
> big deal at all.
>
> Thanks
>  -- Daniel
>

Hi Daniel,

Great!

If we are to rename the command 'reboot', then it may confuse people who are
expecting start/stop/restart from daemons etc - maybe we could rename
start/stop to be boot/halt as well then? Or, although I don't know anything
about the checkpointing stuff, maybe those commands could be
checkpoint/restore?

I'm happy to keep contributing to the code and its maintenance once it's
merged in, but you're probably the best person to do the merge. I know very
little about how lxc works, having only worked with the debian & ubuntu
packaging. I haven't even checked out the git repo before now. Let me know
if there's anything I can do to assist though.

Nigel

-- 
Regards,
Nigel McNie
http://nigel.mcnie.name/ | +64 27 469 6038 | http://twitter.com/nigelmcnie |
http://about.me/nigel
My latest blog post:
http://nigel.mcnie.name/blog/fixing-website-performance-issues-page-request-theory
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxcontainers.org/pipermail/lxc-devel/attachments/20110407/335f27e2/attachment.html>