From owner-freebsd-jail@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Mar 31 15:12:45 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-jail@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ECFA4835; Sun, 31 Mar 2013 15:12:45 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from 000.fbsd@quip.cz) Received: from elsa.codelab.cz (elsa.codelab.cz [94.124.105.4]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ADF30FBA; Sun, 31 Mar 2013 15:12:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from elsa.codelab.cz (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by elsa.codelab.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F83328437; Sun, 31 Mar 2013 17:12:43 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [192.168.1.2] (ip-89-177-49-222.net.upcbroadband.cz [89.177.49.222]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by elsa.codelab.cz (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6FC7A28435; Sun, 31 Mar 2013 17:12:42 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <5158526A.4020400@quip.cz> Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2013 17:12:42 +0200 From: Miroslav Lachman <000.fbsd@quip.cz> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.9.1.19) Gecko/20110420 Lightning/1.0b1 SeaMonkey/2.0.14 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jamie Gritton Subject: Re: rc.d/jail and jail.conf References: <515721F8.9090202@erdgeist.org> <515847AF.8070808@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <515847AF.8070808@FreeBSD.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-jail@FreeBSD.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-jail@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion about FreeBSD jail\(8\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2013 15:12:46 -0000 Jamie Gritton wrote: > On 03/30/13 14:59, Dirk Engling wrote: >> On Sat, 30 Mar 2013, Nicolas de Bari Embriz Garcia Rojas wrote: >> >>> If I am right you can define the order of start for jails in the >>> jail2_list (rc.conf), something like: >>> >>> jail2_list="jail1 jail2" >> >> Thanks, I suppose it mimicks the way rc.d/jail has handled it. I just >> wondered if there's a way to have this order automatically determined by >> a dependency graph, it's a minor request, though. > > jail(8) itself does the dependency graph. So the jail2 startup needs to > run a single jail command instead of one for each jail. So it means jail2 should be fixed, because it runs jail -c -i -J /var/run/jail_${_j}.id ${_j} for each jail from jail2_list="jailA jailB" Is there a way to disable jail defined in jail.conf? (to avoid jail2_list in rc.conf) And what happens if there is jail2_list="jailA jailB" in rc.conf and jailB is defined in jail.conf as dependency of jailA? I guess rc.d/jail2 will try to start jailB again. It will be started as dependency of jailA by first jail command starting jailA. Or new jail(8) doesn't start the "depend" jail automatically and just check its existence? I didn't try it yet. Miroslav Lachman