On 02/28/12 17:30, Martin Matuska wrote:
On 28.2.2012 23:36, Jamie Gritton wrote:
The allow.mount parameter recently changed in a subtle way - it's now
a node (to e.g. allow.mount.devfs) as well as a parameter in its own
right. This confused libjail which knows how to handle such parameters
as long as they're not boolean.
I'm including my proposed fix to libjail. This this fix, allow.nomount
should once again work, as should allow.mount and other things such as
allow.quotas/allow.noquotas should work as they did before.
- Jamie
Thanks. I might MFC this together with all the other new jail stuff to
9-STABLE in a week or so.
Or do we need more testing?
For 8-STABLE, all of this is a no-op, because the prerequisites for all
these changes date back to the VOP_VPTOCNP(9) change by kib.
I've checked that the expected parameters get past the gauntlet, and
that some things that look like them don't (such as host.nohostname).
What I haven't checked, and should be done before I commit - since
you've got it all set up, could you see if these do as you expect?
allow.mount
allow.nomount
allow.mount.devfs
allow.mount.nodevfs
allow.chflags
allow.nochflags
That covers the newly fixed allow.mount, one of your new per-FS allows,
and an existing allow that should work as it did before. Those (except
the last) are all the kind of thing you've been testing anyway so it
shouldn't be too much of an imposition :-). Beyond that, I don't see the
need for 9-specific testing since it has the exact same libjail code.
- Jamie
_______________________________________________
freebsd-jail@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-jail
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-jail-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
