Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/5] Virtualization/containers: startup

[Kirill Korotaev <dev@sw.ru>]

>> Do you have any other ideas/comments on this?
>> I will send additional IPC/filesystems virtualization patches a bit later.
> 
> I think that a patch like this - particularly just the 1/5 part - makes 
> total sense, because regardless of any other details of virtualization, 
> every single scheme is going to need this.
> 
> So I think at least 1/5 (and quite frankly, 2-3/5 look that way too) are 
> things that we can (and probably should) merge quickly, so that people can 
> then actually look at the differences in the places that they may actually 
> disagree about.
Can we merge also proc/sysfs/network/netfilters virtualization?

> In other words, I personally would have called them "container" or 
> something similar, rather than "vps_info". See? From a logical 
> implementation standpoint, the fact that it is right now most commonly 
> used for VPS hosting is totally irrelevant to the code, no?
> 
> (And hey, maybe your "vps" means something different. In which case my 
> argument makes even more sense ;)
virtual private sandbox :)

Actually, we call them "virtual environments" (VE) in OpenVZ. It is more 
than abstract and have a nice brief name. If this suits you - I will be 
happy to commit patches as is :)

other variants:
virtual context (vc, vctx),
virtual containers (vc).

I personally don't like "container", since it is too long and I see no 
good abreviations for this...

Kirill