Re: Bug#645850: lxc package debconf templates
Daniel Baumann wrote:
> Justin B Rye wrote:
>>> i used '_Description: Linux Containers: LXC setup' which is in sync
>>> with what linux-container uses (Linux Containers: Container setup).
>> In that case linux-container probably needs some fixes to bring it in
>> line with DevRef 220.127.116.11.2.
> i'm afraid i don't understand: 18.104.22.168.2 speaks about "Boolean
> templates", not about titles.
Ah, sorry, my mistake; I was assuming you were talking about the
boolean template description (original text "Linux Container:
Automatic start and stop"), since that's the one that started out
looking more like the above. Never mind!
>> (Just for a start, why is that package called "linux-container"
>> rather than "linux-containers"? Is it perhaps an unwise
>> abbreviation of "Linux Container tools"?)
> package names are not and should not use plurals if they are generic.
Wouldn't that rule out package names like "coreutils", "lm-sensors",
The package "linux-container" does not provide either one Linux
Container or many Linux Containers. It provides utilities for the LXC
system - in other words, Linux Container tools (where "container" is
uninflected because it's an attributive modifier in the middle of a
"noun-pile" - compare "postage stamp collection"). If you want to
abbreviate "Linux Container tools", I'm surprised you didn't name the
Oh well, probably too much pain to be worth renaming it now.
>> I would suggest splitting up the template into something like:
>> _Description: Automatically start Linux Containers on boot?
>> Please choose whether appropriately configured Linux Containers should
>> be automatically started during system boot, and shut down on reboot or
>> To take advantage of this, copy or symlink their configuration files
>> into the /etc/lxc/auto directory.
> s/appropriately configured //
> otherwise sounds good, thanks.
Well, taking out the "appropriately configured" makes it less obvious
that these are particular containers (referred back to by the "their"
later on) rather than the whole LXC system that's being autostarted.
Are you unhappy with it because it sounds as if it's a variable being
set in the configuration file? If so, would "appropriately linked" or
something like that be better?
>> I'm still not sure I understand this, though. If it only affects
>> containers that have been manually "opted in", why is it necessary to
>> ask this question? Why not just put it in the README that containers
>> with config files in /etc/lxc/auto will automatically be started on
> a LXC_AUTO=true|false in /etc/default/lxc is important to have for
> sysadmins (aka the users of this package), and having a debconf
> interface for it is nice for those of us that admin more than one
Fair enough, you'll know the use case better than I do.
JBR with qualifications in linguistics, experience as a Debian
sysadmin, and probably no clue about this particular package