Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 24 Jun 2010 14:43:12 +0200
From:      Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@Leidinger.net>
To:        freebsd-jail@freebsd.org, jamie@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: Thoughts on jail.config
Message-ID:  <20100624144312.00003d9f@unknown>
In-Reply-To: <4C22650C.40309@FreeBSD.org>
References:  <4C22650C.40309@FreeBSD.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 23 Jun 2010 13:48:28 -0600 Jamie Gritton <jamie@FreeBSD.org>
wrote:


> The rc system is becoming increasingly unable to handle the newer jail
> features.  We've held off patching /etc/rc.d/jail for new parameters,
> with the promise of something better.  Here's my outline of what I
> hope will be in fact better than what we have now.

I'm not sure from your explanation if your new setup allows ezjail to
mangage jails as easy as it is now. If the new jail command will have
an option to specify a config file, and the jail command only operates
on the jails of this config file and ignores other jails which are
already running (e.g. on a shutdown request), your new system looks
like it is easy to use with ezjail.

Another point which interests me is how your new way of doing things
will handle things like allow.raw_sockets. Assume I have some kernel
modification which adds allow.XXX, do I need to modify the parsing of
the jail command to handle this, or will this work transparently
without userland modifications?

Bye,
Alexander.



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20100624144312.00003d9f>