On 11.11.2015 16:28, Colin Guthrie wrote: > Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote on 11/11/15 13:38: >>>>>> systemd-machine (machined,nspawn,importd) >>>> >>>> We call that package "systemd-container", but it has exactly those, so >>>> "check". >> I think we (Fedora) should follow this, for inter-distro consistency. > > > I prefer that name to systemd-nspawn. As Lennart's original comment on > the systemd-machine package name suggestion was "the name of the daemon > doesn't matter", I'd argue that the name of the binary also doesn't > matter too much! After all, the "nspawn" itself doesn't mean anything > unless you know what nspawn is, and if you know what it is, then you > know what a container is, so the name systemd-container makes sense there. > > So +1 from me for that name as a general recommendation. > > Col > >
man 1 systemd-nspawn "... In many ways it is similar to chroot(1)..." Everyone knows what 'chroot' is, so "systemd-chroot" makes sense there, also. +1 _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
