On Mon, 17 Oct 2016 at 15:26 Dietmar Maurer <diet...@proxmox.com> wrote:
> > Is there any reason why the LXC conf file should not retain the name of
> > original template file? I am prepared to submit a patch for this, if
> > would be acceptable.
> We only store the OS type, for example:
> ostype: debian
> arch: amd64
> Storing the original template seems misleading to me, because users
> often update the container, so the template does not contain the
> same content as the container.
Did anybody find it misleading with OpenVZ containers?
I think the normal usage of the word "template" gives exactly the right
impression here. Just as with a document template or a database template,
you create a new thing based on a template, and then you go on to modify
the thing. I don't see how somebody would arrive at the idea that the
container must be perpetually identical to the template.
Would it alleviate your concern if the config variable were named something
like "original_template" or "creation_template"?
I guess it would be better to use the latest available
> template instead?
Not necessarily. Say for example you've got a legacy application that is
only known to work under Debian 7, or you run heavily customised templates,
or you've used one of the Virtual Appliance templates. In any of those
cases just starting with "latest available Debian" would not be the smart
pve-devel mailing list