Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 11:12:08 -0700 (PDT) From: Nate Lawson <nate@root.org> To: John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> Cc: arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/usr.bin/killall killall.1 killall.csrc/usr.sbinjexec.8 jexec.c src/usr.sbin/jls Makefile jls.8 jls.c Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0304101108290.31875-100000@root.org> In-Reply-To: <XFMail.20030410111957.jhb@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Please take this to arch@. Headers changed appropriately. On Thu, 10 Apr 2003, John Baldwin wrote: > On 09-Apr-2003 Alfred Perlstein wrote: > > Whatever, path components should be path components. > > You mean like this? > > > sysctl -N net.inet.tcp.syncache > net.inet.tcp.syncache.bucketlimit > net.inet.tcp.syncache.cachelimit > net.inet.tcp.syncache.count > net.inet.tcp.syncache.hashsize > net.inet.tcp.syncache.rexmtlimit The answer to your question will depend on whether or not he likes the sysctl namespace. My question was different: since jail already implies a location in file namespace, why implement a new and disjoint namespace for it? -Nate (Yes, I know jail > chroot in terms of features but at the end of the day, you pass in a file path to start a jail.)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.21.0304101108290.31875-100000>