Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2012 17:32:41 -1000 From: Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.org> To: Jun Kuriyama <kuriyama@FreeBSD.org> Cc: freebsd-jail@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [patch] etc/rc.d/jail: allow extra parameters for each jails Message-ID: <502C69D9.8040803@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <CAEz5XLQa9zEa2MPQ4%2ByoAEOf959Tc4oa04pBrpiLXctR8N-V9g@mail.gmail.com> References: <7mlihf1vmg.wl%kuriyama@s2factory.co.jp> <502C65A0.2060606@FreeBSD.org> <CAEz5XLQa9zEa2MPQ4%2ByoAEOf959Tc4oa04pBrpiLXctR8N-V9g@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 08/15/2012 05:24 PM, Jun Kuriyama wrote: > 2012/8/16 Doug Barton <dougb@freebsd.org>: >> On 08/15/2012 03:19 PM, Jun Kuriyama wrote: >>> #jail_example_flags="-l -U root" # flags for jail(8) >>> +#jail_example_parameters="allow.raw_sockets=1" # extra parameters for this jail >> >> Why not just use _flags for this? > > Current implementation of rc.d/jail uses old command line syntax which > cannot pass parameters to jail(8), so main modifications of my patch > is changing this to use new command line style to use with "-c" flag > and named parameters. > > Then, you are right, these named parameters can be passed via _flags > after my patch. I just want separate command line option flags and > named parameters. I don't have strong argument to add _parameters > variables. I just think adding _parameters may be easy to > configure/understand. Thank you for the explanation. FWIW, this sounds reasonable to me. Doug
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?502C69D9.8040803>