From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Jul 13 08:54:08 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@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 34E3D884 for ; Sat, 13 Jul 2013 08:54:08 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from frank2@fjl.co.uk) Received: from bs1.fjl.org.uk (bs1.fjl.org.uk [84.45.41.196]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8EEB71799 for ; Sat, 13 Jul 2013 08:54:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.1.35] (mux.fjl.org.uk [62.3.120.246]) (authenticated bits=0) by bs1.fjl.org.uk (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r6D8s4X6059764 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-DSS-CAMELLIA256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Sat, 13 Jul 2013 09:54:05 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from frank2@fjl.co.uk) Message-ID: <51E115AB.6030004@fjl.co.uk> Date: Sat, 13 Jul 2013 09:54:03 +0100 From: Frank Leonhardt User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130620 Thunderbird/17.0.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: jls usage References: <51DF59B1.4020107@a1poweruser.com> <13CA24D6AB415D428143D44749F57D7201FBF9CF@ltcfiswmsgmb21> <51DFCDD2.2010104@fjl.co.uk> <13CA24D6AB415D428143D44749F57D7201FC19A4@ltcfiswmsgmb21> <51E01A22.7030306@fjl.co.uk> <51E021AA.5030905@fjl.co.uk> <51E02729.7070203@fjl.co.uk> <51E0D3C9.3020505@ShaneWare.Biz> In-Reply-To: <51E0D3C9.3020505@ShaneWare.Biz> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.14 X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 13 Jul 2013 08:54:08 -0000 On 13/07/2013 05:12, Shane Ambler wrote: > On 13/07/2013 01:26, Frank Leonhardt wrote: > >> Okay - answering my own question and solved... It's a bug (or is that a >> feature?). >> >> In /etc/rc.d/jail line 647 it currently reads: >> >> eval ${_setfib} jail ${_flags} -i ${_rootdir} >> ${_hostname} \ >> \"${_addrl}\" ${_exec_start} > ${_tmp_jail} >> 2>&1 \ >> > >> And it should (IMHO) read: >> >> eval ${_setfib} jail ${_flags} -n ${_jail} -i >> ${_rootdir} ${_hostname} \ >> \"${_addrl}\" ${_exec_start} > ${_tmp_jail} >> 2>&1 \ >> > >> Once changed, everything works find and your jails are named as per the >> rc.conf file definitions. Can anyone think of a reason for NOT fixing >> this? > > > Go with bug ;-) - fix (improvement?) is working it's way through. > > You mentioned running 8.2 so I wondered if it has changed. > > If you look through the source tree you will find in 8.4 that line has > the -n ${_jail} addition plus some other extras. > > Looks like it showed up in stable/8 at r242083 as part of a larger > improvement. > Yeah, I spotted that but only after I put in a change request :-( Someone did exactly the same change last July but it wasn't a PR. It's in head (revision 238102) and I suspect it's now in 9.1. Next question: How do you kill a PR you've changed your mind about?