Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2013 17:12:42 +0200 From: Miroslav Lachman <000.fbsd@quip.cz> To: Jamie Gritton <jamie@FreeBSD.org> Cc: freebsd-jail@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: rc.d/jail and jail.conf Message-ID: <5158526A.4020400@quip.cz> In-Reply-To: <515847AF.8070808@FreeBSD.org> References: <515721F8.9090202@erdgeist.org> <AA7CA531-5197-4BBC-B260-A3EC8B7A1024@inbox.im> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1303302157010.85469@erdgeist.org> <515847AF.8070808@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
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
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?5158526A.4020400>