Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2017 21:50:34 +0000 From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 218849] Remove rc.conf jail configuration via jail_* variables Message-ID: <bug-218849-8-GpL5anJsWc@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> In-Reply-To: <bug-218849-8@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> References: <bug-218849-8@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218849 erdgeist@erdgeist.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |erdgeist@erdgeist.org --- Comment #13 from erdgeist@erdgeist.org --- (In reply to Ngie Cooper from comment #12) Actually, I can not really see a benefit at all in removing that converter in base. It is not like the OS hands users of jail.conf like files a tool to properly create or modify them. Jamie's rewrite of jail(8) just broke editing jail configs for shell scripts. No big deal, as long as the OS keeps a compatibility until there ARE tools. However, once you start taking these converters away from the base, it needs to be reimplemented in several ports, possibly leading to errors with each implementation. If there would be a simple jail-admin tool allowing me operate on those complex structures from a script, or if there would be something like a jail.d with management scopes, where I'd be sure that configs are not manually touched, I would happily give up config in shell variables. I also volunteered in getting stuff done, by adding code to jail(8) to extend the parser with config file management functionality, but Jamie used to be not as reponsive as I would've loved. If there's others wanting to review and possibly commit changes to the tool, I'd say that we go for it. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-218849-8-GpL5anJsWc>