Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2006 15:16:29 +0200 From: Dirk Engling <erdgeist@erdgeist.org> To: Florent Thoumie <flz@xbsd.org> Cc: freebsd-rc@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: RFC: new rc.d/jail changes (templating fstab entries and rootdir) Message-ID: <44BE30AD.3020106@erdgeist.org> In-Reply-To: <1153313706.70633.8.camel@mayday.esat.net> References: <1151336698.39710.23.camel@mayday.esat.net> <1153313706.70633.8.camel@mayday.esat.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Florent Thoumie wrote: > Ping? I don't like the way all this goes. The problem (still) is, that there is no good abstraction for a jail, hence it is hard to group jails together which would be the right way to 'templatize' common actions. Mount stuff belongs to /etc/fstab.jailname, period. It does not (or rarely) change, so there is really no need to do run time calculations and even put variable names into your rc.conf (which seems a bad idea in itself). If you have a proper abstraction and can group jails, editing those fstabs via a configuration utility should be simple. My mail with the proposed patch to start abstracting jails in /etc/jails has been ignored on the list, maybe this is the right time to bring it up again: http://erdgeist.org/arts/software/jail/jail.1.34.diff with that patch it is possible to have an alternative location for your jail configs without the need to configure the jail list manually in rc.conf. Those per-jail config files can be read, altered and deleted by very simple means. They could serve as a convenient starting point to templatize at creation time, not run time. Any comments, criticism? Regards erdgeist -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (Darwin) iD8DBQFEvjCsImmQdUyYEgkRAszvAJ4oWuriTX/38U6m6w7soSXdkveLdACgkhhE pE2N5kCiQ+TtzLtu4T/sJWg= =gUET -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?44BE30AD.3020106>