On 06/29/2012 11:32 AM, Stefan Schlesinger wrote:
>
> On Jun 29, 2012, at 4:19 PM, Jonathan Carter (highvoltage) wrote:
>> I would've put it on github or something but it's definitely going to be
>> abandoned for a python version that uses liblxc.
>>
>>> Would someone care to write a patch to imp
On Jun 29, 2012, at 4:19 PM, Jonathan Carter (highvoltage) wrote:
> I would've put it on github or something but it's definitely going to be
> abandoned for a python version that uses liblxc.
>
>> Would someone care to write a patch to implement ls in the api, against
>> lp:~ubuntu-lxc/ubuntu/qu
Hi Serge
On 29/06/2012 10:02, Serge Hallyn wrote:
> Good point. But note that lxc-ls is currently a script with no code in
> liblxc, so while we may get a version of the API with no ls defined, at
> least it won't have ls badly defined :)
>
>> IMHO the functionality of the three status commands c
Quoting Stefan Schlesinger (s...@ono.at):
>
> On Jun 28, 2012, at 5:35 PM, Ward, David - 0663 - MITLL wrote:
> > Just FYI, current git now allows you to list running containers
> > only with the '--active' flag to lxc-ls.
>
> The current version in Git also lists 'lost+found' as a virtual machine
On Jun 28, 2012, at 5:35 PM, Ward, David - 0663 - MITLL wrote:
> Just FYI, current git now allows you to list running containers
> only with the '--active' flag to lxc-ls.
The current version in Git also lists 'lost+found' as a virtual machine,
in case /var/lib/lxc is a separate filesystem (same
On Jun 28, 2012, at 5:38 PM, Jonathan Carter (highvoltage) wrote:
> So what's been happening is that Stéphane is writing nice Python bindings for
> LXC in C. Currently my hacky script is calling the rest of the current LXC
> scripts. My goal is to redo rlxc as a nice Python script that uses that
Hi David,
On Jun 28, 2012, at 5:35 PM, Ward, David - 0663 - MITLL wrote:
> Just FYI, current git now allows you to list running containers
> only with the '--active' flag to lxc-ls.
when I type in lxc-ls manually, I guess I will want to add --active for
90 percent of the time.
I already saw the
Hi Stefan!
On 28/06/2012 10:49, Stefan Schlesinger wrote:
> I'm new to LXC and have been using OpenVZ until now.
>
> Something which I immediately missed, when I played around with the LXC
> CLI tools the first time, was that neither lxc-ls nor lxc-list provide
> a nice overview of the current sta
On 28/06/12 10:49, Stefan Schlesinger wrote:
Hello,
I'm new to LXC and have been using OpenVZ until now.
Something which I immediately missed, when I played around with the LXC
CLI tools the first time, was that neither lxc-ls nor lxc-list provide
a nice overview of the current status of your h
