From owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Fri Feb 2 18:04:41 2018 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1BE7EEE70D6 for ; Fri, 2 Feb 2018 18:04:41 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wblock@wonkity.com) Received: from wonkity.com (wonkity.com [67.158.26.137]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "wonkity.com", Issuer "wonkity.com" (not verified)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A41B277D94 for ; Fri, 2 Feb 2018 18:04:40 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wblock@wonkity.com) Received: from wonkity.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by wonkity.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id w12I4dd2061952 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 2 Feb 2018 11:04:39 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from wblock@wonkity.com) Received: from localhost (wblock@localhost) by wonkity.com (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) with ESMTP id w12I4dWa061948; Fri, 2 Feb 2018 11:04:39 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from wblock@wonkity.com) Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2018 11:04:39 -0700 (MST) From: Warren Block To: Steve Pointer cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Jails, ping, and now DNS In-Reply-To: <1517588082.2117241.1257377040.499E7DC3@webmail.messagingengine.com> Message-ID: References: <737005a0c3e97d8d1e9306eb52471f89.squirrel@webmail.harte-lyne.ca> <5A74875F.9080901@gmail.com> <1517588082.2117241.1257377040.499E7DC3@webmail.messagingengine.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.21 (BSF 202 2017-01-01) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.6.2 (wonkity.com [127.0.0.1]); Fri, 02 Feb 2018 11:04:39 -0700 (MST) X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.25 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2018 18:04:41 -0000 On Fri, 2 Feb 2018, Steve Pointer wrote: >> Your problem is your using ezjail which uses the deprecated rc.conf >> environment-variable method. Most jail users have stopped using ezjail >> so support for problems like you are having is very limited. >> >> Every time you start a ezjail jail an error message popes out telling >> you to convert your jail system to the jail.conf method. That error >> message has been issued since 9.1. Its about time you do as it says >> before you get caught with a unsupported production jail environment. >> There is a good chance the deprecated rc.conf environment-variable >> method will be removed in 12.0 release. >> >> If you are addicted to the ezjail jail coding method then check out >> qjail which is a fork of ezjail that uses the jail.conf method. >> > > The FreeBSD handbook refers to ezjail: > > https://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/jails.html > > If this is no longer the best method then maybe this should be changed. If a bug report was posted with edits to the recommended method what do most people use? There are numerous jail management methods. ezjail was and still is popular. The warning message has annoyed enough people that there is actually a sysctl to disable it now. > qjail ? Personally I have had success with iocage , which I understood all the cool kids were using now. qjail is a forked version of ezjail. It is strongly recommended by the person who forked it. There is a long story here, and a search of the mail archives will result in some interesting reading. > https://github.com/iocage/iocage > > Am I in the minority in using this method? iocage is a valid choice, and probably the most popular new jail management method. Of course, there are two versions of iocage, one in shell and one in Python.