5

and seem to be partially overlapping tags.

So while LXC is the acronym for LinuX Containers and names the project as well as the software, there are now three major versions of LXC: 1.x through 3.x.

The LXC >=2.x versions are often referred to as LXD (after the lxd daemon). However, lxd (the daemon) and lxc the LXD command line client are two different entities. Yet both belong into the category LXC 2.x.

In the old LXC 1.x version there was no program called lxc, instead all the tools were prefixed with lxc-, such as for example lxc-create and lxc-ls.

So I think we should either:

  1. clarify what these tags stand for in particular (e.g. does refer to LXC >=2.x in general, including its lxc command line client?), or
  2. migrate existing LXC 1.x questions to a which would have to be created (and possibly do something similar with a ), or
  3. some other means to clarify the intent when using either tag ( and ), i.e. your idea here ;)

For now, when I want to refer to "client-side" questions (i.e. using the lxc command line client) about LXD, I was using both and . But I figure it makes more sense to reach some consensus within the community rather than making my own rules.

  • 2
    Based on very little experience on the topic and very little research on the questions here, and mainly on the small quantity of them, how reasonable would it be to have a single “Linux container” tag and merge the existing Q’s together? – Jeff Schaller Nov 28 '17 at 23:37
  • @JeffSchaller: well the problem with that might be that people are confusing one with the other. It's conflating two related but still distinct topics, really. – 0xC0000022L Nov 30 '17 at 20:41
  • As I understand it, LXC is the underlying technology and concepts, whereas LXD is an implementation of the toolset (Redhat docs point out the coincidentally named utility lxc that belongs in the LXD packages). – Qix Dec 2 '17 at 2:35
  • @Qix and exactly that's the issue. What does lxc refer to? The client command line tool of LXD or the technology? Tags are always lowercase, so this is very ambiguous. Does it refer to the technology or the command line tool? To LCX 1.x or 2.x? – 0xC0000022L Dec 2 '17 at 22:42
  • @0xC0000022L lxc refers to the technology. The command line utility is not referred to as often in dialog or literature. lcx could definitely have some extra tags for lxc-1.x and lxc-2.x if necessary. But I see no reason these two are being conflated. LXD's lxc still deals with lcx so there's a good chance the lxc tag is relevant, too. I don't think a sweeping action is going to help a lot here IMO. – Qix Dec 3 '17 at 2:12
  • 1
    @Qix: agreed, it's not yet, because it's comparably new (especially if you use packaged software rather than building your own). My point is that quite literally and unless you're interested in the underlying technology - which would be better suited for StackOverflow than here - lxc now and the future is more likely to refer to the command line tool. Yet, because of lxc-1.x questions referring to the incompatible older tools will be tagged the same. Aren't tags there to help make easy distinctions rather than add to the confusion? Sweeping would be just one possible path ... – 0xC0000022L Dec 3 '17 at 16:28
  • @Qix, did you mean to type lcx in your comments above. Is "lcx" supposed to mean LinuxContainerXYZ? – rjt Dec 6 '17 at 15:34
  • 1
    It was a typo @rjt. No need to be snarky. – Qix Dec 7 '17 at 8:23
  • 1
    @Qix, i am new to this. Since it was a typo repeated by both of you, i thought maybe it was referring to something else. Thanks for contributing. No intentions of being snarky and generally try to avoid that attitude. Well until this evening on Twitter when asked what improvements i would like to see in Google. Chrome, but i digress. – rjt Dec 8 '17 at 4:53
  • @rjt: lcx was the typo, yes. lxc is the proper acronym for LinuX Containers (hence LXC). – 0xC0000022L Apr 16 '18 at 21:37

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .