From owner-freebsd-jail@freebsd.org Sun Jun 12 12:16:38 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-jail@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63C8DAF0F52 for ; Sun, 12 Jun 2016 12:16:38 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from list1@gjunka.com) Received: from msa1.earth.yoonka.com (yoonka.com [185.24.122.233]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "msa1.earth.yoonka.com", Issuer "msa1.earth.yoonka.com" (not verified)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EA42A2D33 for ; Sun, 12 Jun 2016 12:16:37 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from list1@gjunka.com) Received: from crayon2.yoonka.com (crayon2.yoonka.com [192.168.1.20]) (authenticated bits=0) by msa1.earth.yoonka.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id u5CCGS6J032811 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Sun, 12 Jun 2016 12:16:29 GMT (envelope-from list1@gjunka.com) To: freebsd-jail@freebsd.org From: Grzegorz Junka Subject: qjail or qjail2? Message-ID: <6d708ff4-de99-bfc5-f2d7-2568fa368256@gjunka.com> Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2016 12:16:28 +0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.1.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-jail@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion about FreeBSD jail\(8\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2016 12:16:38 -0000 Which qjail should I use, qjail 4.7 or qjail2 2.2? Does the qjail project have any documentation apart from http://qjail.sourceforge.net/? Grzegorz From owner-freebsd-jail@freebsd.org Sun Jun 12 13:07:25 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-jail@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2ABC0AF0B2C for ; Sun, 12 Jun 2016 13:07:25 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lists@opsec.eu) Received: from home.opsec.eu (home.opsec.eu [IPv6:2001:14f8:200::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E44A82F7B for ; Sun, 12 Jun 2016 13:07:24 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lists@opsec.eu) Received: from pi by home.opsec.eu with local (Exim 4.87 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1bC56o-000EaQ-T8; Sun, 12 Jun 2016 15:07:22 +0200 Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2016 15:07:22 +0200 From: Kurt Jaeger To: Grzegorz Junka Cc: freebsd-jail@freebsd.org Subject: Re: qjail or qjail2? Message-ID: <20160612130722.GC41922@home.opsec.eu> References: <6d708ff4-de99-bfc5-f2d7-2568fa368256@gjunka.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <6d708ff4-de99-bfc5-f2d7-2568fa368256@gjunka.com> X-BeenThere: freebsd-jail@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion about FreeBSD jail\(8\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2016 13:07:25 -0000 Hi! > Which qjail should I use, qjail 4.7 or qjail2 2.2? Does the qjail > project have any documentation apart from http://qjail.sourceforge.net/? qjail, as qjail2 is a non-longer updated version of qjail, as far as I understand. -- pi@opsec.eu +49 171 3101372 4 years to go ! From owner-freebsd-jail@freebsd.org Sun Jun 12 14:55:54 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-jail@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C5CADAF1FBA for ; Sun, 12 Jun 2016 14:55:54 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from list1@gjunka.com) Received: from msa1.earth.yoonka.com (yoonka.com [185.24.122.233]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "msa1.earth.yoonka.com", Issuer "msa1.earth.yoonka.com" (not verified)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6FFAC2736 for ; Sun, 12 Jun 2016 14:55:53 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from list1@gjunka.com) Received: from crayon2.yoonka.com (crayon2.yoonka.com [192.168.1.20]) (authenticated bits=0) by msa1.earth.yoonka.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id u5CEtqxQ035303 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Sun, 12 Jun 2016 14:55:52 GMT (envelope-from list1@gjunka.com) Subject: Re: qjail or qjail2? References: <6d708ff4-de99-bfc5-f2d7-2568fa368256@gjunka.com> <20160612130722.GC41922@home.opsec.eu> To: freebsd-jail@freebsd.org From: Grzegorz Junka Message-ID: <3fe16418-124d-d591-043e-9aad854e7df8@gjunka.com> Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2016 14:55:52 +0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.1.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20160612130722.GC41922@home.opsec.eu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-jail@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion about FreeBSD jail\(8\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2016 14:55:54 -0000 On 12/06/2016 13:07, Kurt Jaeger wrote: > Hi! > >> Which qjail should I use, qjail 4.7 or qjail2 2.2? Does the qjail >> project have any documentation apart from http://qjail.sourceforge.net/? > qjail, as qjail2 is a non-longer updated version of qjail, as > far as I understand. > Both have some recent changes in their respective SVN branches: https://www.freshports.org/sysutils/qjail https://www.freshports.org/sysutils/qjail2 And both don't seem to have received too many updates recently. From owner-freebsd-jail@freebsd.org Sun Jun 12 15:44:11 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-jail@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6DFAAF0AE5 for ; Sun, 12 Jun 2016 15:44:11 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from luzar722@gmail.com) Received: from mail-io0-x236.google.com (mail-io0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c06::236]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 705EE2A95 for ; Sun, 12 Jun 2016 15:44:11 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from luzar722@gmail.com) Received: by mail-io0-x236.google.com with SMTP id d2so14908706iof.0 for ; Sun, 12 Jun 2016 08:44:11 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=WZEpyr2/kELklbGryhTnSe4yakOXi6X2Dz5GfKr5juA=; b=uCQDRkrKB4JSZIEtqq73RYOJDR0qi7glZ5w6UxSwyUzP9wUnCvyPLRM/i6/VlQBkUK IUDXZVVpFIUIzNYKwYZn+woWYEsEA5lul6SmjFWKUNc7DpYvsZ8mQcwRMBQRfKYSTSgY bhZt2UG0vuFi2qeKFNHpeCslUilrG+dMPGYfZmhSB7cz5BC11B5JaE2TuLObZFZoyxrz YUg3EFCibkXE2/QKVxALBRVm2j9vZRA6r/i+yet7uk1gscTo/PC+1pN7K3ct/3+0jo2m yif24zI/SOiIxu/kBM1OR1+eS+b9+dHIn9BX/MC6H+/VQyueNEFbeJZM8IQr1m2Ew4no BhSw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to :cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=WZEpyr2/kELklbGryhTnSe4yakOXi6X2Dz5GfKr5juA=; b=I88Unldztd7205r39M5aSWMZOnPfysnXRlJ7WacyD0EFREWfijWxdbG/RYoZgxQ1iQ 7Jnqjf0Kb0wOFx/uBWDtNWkdmfFCAyfLWtct3Hfrg+TDZey57o50sG1hdQvBHrly/fLh H6JogmywK84+Yw6YpxbxuZRxW/j23LDoADBof3jjYkuRlxfYk3Be77OcCWjGRA4pDM+J yl418EEdH/neS3Do+7IP7i4W5etn6ytTDoSOMqRlJI5aulfOB2RaY5EOkueL2aWY561j 2BaaqYUinFiDHZi0yDiAt0s3RVjGTTuyn8q/vRTo5HNjLDjc9uJMO50lz94yhrG5diUz 0g9Q== X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tKdfni1HPJGRkVTq+YockKOplCSifh61A8l3FXaqPmBPdRlGemxEqDKrVYcF4kD5A== X-Received: by 10.107.59.216 with SMTP id i207mr5412187ioa.30.1465746250781; Sun, 12 Jun 2016 08:44:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.0.10.3] (cpe-184-56-210-236.neo.res.rr.com. [184.56.210.236]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id i66sm10209794ioo.21.2016.06.12.08.44.09 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Sun, 12 Jun 2016 08:44:10 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <575D8358.2070508@gmail.com> Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2016 11:44:24 -0400 From: Ernie Luzar User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (Windows/20100228) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Grzegorz Junka CC: freebsd-jail@freebsd.org Subject: Re: qjail or qjail2? References: <6d708ff4-de99-bfc5-f2d7-2568fa368256@gjunka.com> <20160612130722.GC41922@home.opsec.eu> <3fe16418-124d-d591-043e-9aad854e7df8@gjunka.com> In-Reply-To: <3fe16418-124d-d591-043e-9aad854e7df8@gjunka.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-jail@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion about FreeBSD jail\(8\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2016 15:44:11 -0000 Grzegorz Junka wrote: > > On 12/06/2016 13:07, Kurt Jaeger wrote: >> Hi! >> >>> Which qjail should I use, qjail 4.7 or qjail2 2.2? Does the qjail >>> project have any documentation apart from http://qjail.sourceforge.net/? >> qjail, as qjail2 is a non-longer updated version of qjail, as >> far as I understand. >> > > Both have some recent changes in their respective SVN branches: > https://www.freshports.org/sysutils/qjail > https://www.freshports.org/sysutils/qjail2 > > And both don't seem to have received too many updates recently. For your info www.freshports.org is really not the official place to inquire about freebsd ports. The content of your post shows you got incorrect info. If you had read the SVN "long description" of qjail2 you will see this "This is the last version that handles both the 8.x and 9.x install media formats." Thats why it has no updates. Its just a version of qjail that has been frozen in time to support the old format of install media for freebsd versions that reach EOL in December this year. https://svnweb.freebsd.org/ports/head/sysutils/qjail2/pkg-descr?revision=HEAD The "long description" of qjail says this "This qjail version is not intended for RELEASES older than RELEASE-10.0." https://svnweb.freebsd.org/ports/head/sysutils/qjail/pkg-descr?revision=HEAD And if you check the qjail change log you will see qjail does indeed have resent updates. https://svnweb.freebsd.org/ports/head/sysutils/qjail/?view=log So to answer your original question. The documentation is installed with qjail when qjail is installed. As far as to what version to install is totally dependent on which version of Freebsd your running on your host. For 9.3 and older use qjail2. For 10.0 and newer use qjail. The SVN "long description" is real clear about that. From owner-freebsd-jail@freebsd.org Sun Jun 12 16:28:08 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-jail@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 902BAAF12CA for ; Sun, 12 Jun 2016 16:28:08 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from list1@gjunka.com) Received: from msa1.earth.yoonka.com (yoonka.com [185.24.122.233]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "msa1.earth.yoonka.com", Issuer "msa1.earth.yoonka.com" (not verified)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3D52F26D3 for ; Sun, 12 Jun 2016 16:28:07 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from list1@gjunka.com) Received: from crayon2.yoonka.com (crayon2.yoonka.com [192.168.1.20]) (authenticated bits=0) by msa1.earth.yoonka.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id u5CGS5nP036502 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Sun, 12 Jun 2016 16:28:06 GMT (envelope-from list1@gjunka.com) Subject: Re: qjail or qjail2? To: freebsd-jail@freebsd.org References: <6d708ff4-de99-bfc5-f2d7-2568fa368256@gjunka.com> <20160612130722.GC41922@home.opsec.eu> <3fe16418-124d-d591-043e-9aad854e7df8@gjunka.com> <575D8358.2070508@gmail.com> From: Grzegorz Junka Message-ID: <7b5e74b1-4c77-f9e6-056b-d4c91cbf961f@gjunka.com> Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2016 16:28:05 +0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.1.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <575D8358.2070508@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-jail@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion about FreeBSD jail\(8\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2016 16:28:08 -0000 On 12/06/2016 15:44, Ernie Luzar wrote: > Grzegorz Junka wrote: >> >> On 12/06/2016 13:07, Kurt Jaeger wrote: >>> Hi! >>> >>>> Which qjail should I use, qjail 4.7 or qjail2 2.2? Does the qjail >>>> project have any documentation apart from >>>> http://qjail.sourceforge.net/? >>> qjail, as qjail2 is a non-longer updated version of qjail, as >>> far as I understand. >>> >> >> Both have some recent changes in their respective SVN branches: >> https://www.freshports.org/sysutils/qjail >> https://www.freshports.org/sysutils/qjail2 >> >> And both don't seem to have received too many updates recently. > > For your info www.freshports.org is really not the official place to > inquire about freebsd ports. The content of your post shows you got > incorrect info. > > If you had read the SVN "long description" of qjail2 you will see this > "This is the last version that handles both the 8.x and 9.x install > media formats." Thats why it has no updates. Its just a version of > qjail that has been frozen in time to support the old format of > install media for freebsd versions that reach EOL in December this year. > https://svnweb.freebsd.org/ports/head/sysutils/qjail2/pkg-descr?revision=HEAD > > > The "long description" of qjail says this > "This qjail version is not intended for RELEASES older than > RELEASE-10.0." > https://svnweb.freebsd.org/ports/head/sysutils/qjail/pkg-descr?revision=HEAD > > > And if you check the qjail change log you will see qjail does indeed > have resent updates. > https://svnweb.freebsd.org/ports/head/sysutils/qjail/?view=log > > So to answer your original question. > > The documentation is installed with qjail when qjail is installed. > As far as to what version to install is totally dependent on which > version of Freebsd your running on your host. > For 9.3 and older use qjail2. For 10.0 and newer use qjail. The SVN > "long description" is real clear about that. > Sorry, but I will have to disagree with "The SVN 'long description' is real clear about that.". If it was real clear then I wouldn't bother asking on this list and taking your time and others. BTW the svnweb links you posted show exactly the same messages as freshports, and I didn't say that qjail doesn't have recent updates. I said that both of them have been updated recently. I read the note "This is the last version that handles both the 8.x and 9.x install media formats." but apparently understood it differently than intended. First of all, I don't know what is a media format, especially 8.x and 9.x media format. Since I don't use one my take on that was that it's not applicable to me. Since that version of qjail supports something that I don't care about, I just look at the remaining of the message, which is the same for both versions, hence the confusion. I also read the note for qjail that it "is not intended for RELEASES older than RELEASE-10.0.", which is fine since I run release 10.3. So here you go, there is qjail2 that supports some exotic media format, and qjail that supports FreeBSD RELEASE-10.0 and newer. How should I go about deciding which one to use? It would certainly help if: - the version of qjail supporting legacy systems was named qjail0 rather than qjail2 - or the version of qjail supporting FreeBSD RELEASE-10.0 was named qjail3 (or qjail4 since 4 is its minor revision now) - or/and the message for qjail2 simply stated: "This version supports FreeBSD RELEASE 8.x and 9.x. For RELEASE 10.0 and newer use qjail." Many thanks for the clarification. Grzegorz From owner-freebsd-jail@freebsd.org Sun Jun 12 16:39:16 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-jail@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 25E3AAF14E2 for ; Sun, 12 Jun 2016 16:39:16 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lists@opsec.eu) Received: from home.opsec.eu (home.opsec.eu [IPv6:2001:14f8:200::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DE0E92A6B for ; Sun, 12 Jun 2016 16:39:15 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lists@opsec.eu) Received: from pi by home.opsec.eu with local (Exim 4.87 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1bC8Pt-000F0R-K6; Sun, 12 Jun 2016 18:39:17 +0200 Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2016 18:39:17 +0200 From: Kurt Jaeger To: Grzegorz Junka Cc: freebsd-jail@freebsd.org Subject: Re: qjail or qjail2? Message-ID: <20160612163917.GF41922@home.opsec.eu> References: <6d708ff4-de99-bfc5-f2d7-2568fa368256@gjunka.com> <20160612130722.GC41922@home.opsec.eu> <3fe16418-124d-d591-043e-9aad854e7df8@gjunka.com> <575D8358.2070508@gmail.com> <7b5e74b1-4c77-f9e6-056b-d4c91cbf961f@gjunka.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <7b5e74b1-4c77-f9e6-056b-d4c91cbf961f@gjunka.com> X-BeenThere: freebsd-jail@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion about FreeBSD jail\(8\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2016 16:39:16 -0000 Hi! > It would certainly help if: > - the version of qjail supporting legacy systems was named qjail0 > rather than qjail2 That ship probably has sailed. > - or the version of qjail supporting FreeBSD RELEASE-10.0 was named > qjail3 (or qjail4 since 4 is its minor revision now) > - or/and the message for qjail2 simply stated: > > "This version supports FreeBSD RELEASE 8.x and 9.x. For RELEASE 10.0 and > newer use qjail." Would you please submit a PR that makes this change to pkg-descr or such ? If maintainer agrees, this would clarify it for future generations to come 8-} -- pi@opsec.eu +49 171 3101372 4 years to go ! From owner-freebsd-jail@freebsd.org Sun Jun 12 16:51:24 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-jail@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84859AF1741 for ; Sun, 12 Jun 2016 16:51:24 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from list1@gjunka.com) Received: from msa1.earth.yoonka.com (yoonka.com [185.24.122.233]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "msa1.earth.yoonka.com", Issuer "msa1.earth.yoonka.com" (not verified)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2D6A42EEA for ; Sun, 12 Jun 2016 16:51:23 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from list1@gjunka.com) Received: from crayon2.yoonka.com (crayon2.yoonka.com [192.168.1.20]) (authenticated bits=0) by msa1.earth.yoonka.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id u5CGpLjj036783 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Sun, 12 Jun 2016 16:51:21 GMT (envelope-from list1@gjunka.com) Subject: Re: qjail or qjail2? References: <6d708ff4-de99-bfc5-f2d7-2568fa368256@gjunka.com> <20160612130722.GC41922@home.opsec.eu> <3fe16418-124d-d591-043e-9aad854e7df8@gjunka.com> <575D8358.2070508@gmail.com> <7b5e74b1-4c77-f9e6-056b-d4c91cbf961f@gjunka.com> <20160612163917.GF41922@home.opsec.eu> To: freebsd-jail@freebsd.org From: Grzegorz Junka Message-ID: Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2016 16:51:21 +0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.1.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20160612163917.GF41922@home.opsec.eu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-jail@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion about FreeBSD jail\(8\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2016 16:51:24 -0000 On 12/06/2016 16:39, Kurt Jaeger wrote: > Hi! > >> It would certainly help if: >> - the version of qjail supporting legacy systems was named qjail0 >> rather than qjail2 > That ship probably has sailed. > >> - or the version of qjail supporting FreeBSD RELEASE-10.0 was named >> qjail3 (or qjail4 since 4 is its minor revision now) >> - or/and the message for qjail2 simply stated: >> >> "This version supports FreeBSD RELEASE 8.x and 9.x. For RELEASE 10.0 and >> newer use qjail." > Would you please submit a PR that makes this change to pkg-descr or such ? > > If maintainer agrees, this would clarify it for future generations to come 8-} > I am not sure how to make a patch, but the change should be small enough to handle manually: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=210238 From owner-freebsd-jail@freebsd.org Sun Jun 12 17:00:03 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-jail@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 40101AF1854 for ; Sun, 12 Jun 2016 17:00:03 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from pi@opsec.eu) Received: from home.opsec.eu (home.opsec.eu [IPv6:2001:14f8:200::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 030E92190 for ; Sun, 12 Jun 2016 17:00:03 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from pi@opsec.eu) Received: from pi by home.opsec.eu with local (Exim 4.87 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1bC8k0-000F3c-JF; Sun, 12 Jun 2016 19:00:04 +0200 Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2016 19:00:04 +0200 From: Kurt Jaeger To: Grzegorz Junka Cc: freebsd-jail@freebsd.org Subject: Re: qjail or qjail2? Message-ID: <20160612170004.GG41922@home.opsec.eu> References: <6d708ff4-de99-bfc5-f2d7-2568fa368256@gjunka.com> <20160612130722.GC41922@home.opsec.eu> <3fe16418-124d-d591-043e-9aad854e7df8@gjunka.com> <575D8358.2070508@gmail.com> <7b5e74b1-4c77-f9e6-056b-d4c91cbf961f@gjunka.com> <20160612163917.GF41922@home.opsec.eu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-BeenThere: freebsd-jail@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion about FreeBSD jail\(8\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2016 17:00:03 -0000 Hi! > > If maintainer agrees, this would clarify it for future generations to come 8-} > I am not sure how to make a patch, but the change should be small enough > to handle manually: > > https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=210238 Thanks. qjail2 has no maintainer, so I just added it. -- pi@opsec.eu +49 171 3101372 4 years to go ! From owner-freebsd-jail@freebsd.org Mon Jun 13 15:38:26 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-jail@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 420A3AF0164 for ; Mon, 13 Jun 2016 15:38:26 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::16:76]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 329542E46 for ; Mon, 13 Jun 2016 15:38:26 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from bugs.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.118]) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id u5DFcPnc027731 for ; Mon, 13 Jun 2016 15:38:26 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: freebsd-jail@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 210049] jails mishandle the default lo0 127.0.0.1 loopback interface Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2016 15:38:26 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: Base System X-Bugzilla-Component: kern X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.3-RELEASE X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Many People X-Bugzilla-Who: linimon@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Status: New X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: --- X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: freebsd-jail@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: assigned_to short_desc Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-jail@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion about FreeBSD jail\(8\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2016 15:38:26 -0000 https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D210049 Mark Linimon changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Assignee|freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org |freebsd-jail@FreeBSD.org Summary|jails & the default lo0 |jails mishandle the default |127.0.0.1 loopback | lo0 127.0.0.1 loopback |interface |interface --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.= From owner-freebsd-jail@freebsd.org Sat Jun 18 17:45:50 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-jail@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B4F6A791AA; Sat, 18 Jun 2016 17:45:50 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from luzar722@gmail.com) Received: from mail-it0-x241.google.com (mail-it0-x241.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c0b::241]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3FC361F4D; Sat, 18 Jun 2016 17:45:47 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from luzar722@gmail.com) Received: by mail-it0-x241.google.com with SMTP id q11so420176itd.2; Sat, 18 Jun 2016 10:45:47 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :content-transfer-encoding; bh=VvxzLewQ05sORXzgjrFq80Rlb8zr0HrIOBoM1+coydc=; b=nBynRwlL+tr2rqtgObf7ap2v3KFTF/nxXChR3v3qsGDZecGWE8fBJB2qG8Vt6YyNuq 4lwfmdZKlP+4r60FgBmq3a9j3GrxQpqkSHj9UnvrFlzHFPpDC7+zx9MvN660BVM3xDxf EwT5my59O3DQrs+hp38F8df0LoRV+h5H3KXvnmlZ8W6RDSUraPEzuVFNdCCtLOs7Pvj5 ix/1RTduBslOz5Zq3iw9CvMCBO9Jl7EkQ1EfqGgC5+MdNccZzXW7YdcnYi+CIPPyAl+k TAb/LUZ9FhHKJlAfL9c8sx96NdgPrIEhh1rr/CiEuMg3IzLipJbULRNHKlaxLLTj9W/P zklw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to :cc:subject:content-transfer-encoding; bh=VvxzLewQ05sORXzgjrFq80Rlb8zr0HrIOBoM1+coydc=; b=Qhti9/A1+78GicWL603ZAmTD4ki0J/osIRjkT641eFDoUHRWfNazqEan/4wc7UJCMn G87ClDZotEFJzqwLDvB3SUfPKFSXvsFqyo2LxKrZCicLrpM6g6XDaJcmvO3Jq6EEPNFn 2ou+LgsAd4jxWDQG2pUwdqezk9SIcM9GmmX3xfufPS838ewGFGEfkhXKCIjHzM0hXxzD E1F3NwGgTZSmIFCorbu+brLbHUq9d7wvUBOSYAcchW3DdbGxY8W12WMWhj7V2JU8kPLk GCBL74VnHwwX8pv3Mw3VMX8agsmufMOhVrftOgLX/yVon6Y2Ggwmw5d9Ec++11QwPlgZ T77Q== X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tIEGGd1rUnYFybGA7QG+ZeG9IaZEtyvzsNRZPP/wzDvxoT35XrMDpjyJiFGi1anUA== X-Received: by 10.36.149.4 with SMTP id m4mr6407487itd.94.1466271946643; Sat, 18 Jun 2016 10:45:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.0.10.3] (cpe-184-56-210-236.neo.res.rr.com. [184.56.210.236]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id p21sm11191105iop.0.2016.06.18.10.45.45 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Sat, 18 Jun 2016 10:45:46 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <576588D6.6050803@gmail.com> Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2016 13:45:58 -0400 From: Ernie Luzar User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (Windows/20100228) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Freebsd Questions CC: "freebsd-jail@freebsd.org" Subject: 11.0-ALPHA4 and VIMAGE Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-jail@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion about FreeBSD jail\(8\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2016 17:45:50 -0000 Hello list; I have installed 11.0-ALPHA4-i386-20160617-r301975 to test VIMAGE. I have read previous list posts saying vimage was going to be part of the base system in 11.0. When I configure a jail with vnet I get a error typical of vimage not being compiled into the kernel. To me it looks like vimage is not part of the base system in 11.0. What is the status of vimage in 11.0?