https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218849
Mark Linimon changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|mfc-stable11-, |
|mfc-stable10-,
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218849
Rodney W. Grimes changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|curr...@freebsd.org |
--- Comment #33 from Rodney W.
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218849
Nicolas Hainaux changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nh.te...@gmail.com
--- Comment #
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218849
jtkoert...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jtkoert...@gmail.com
--- Com
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218849
vali gholami changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tablosazi.fara...@gmail.com
--- Com
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218849
--- Comment #29 from Joe Barbish ---
Today I submitted PR# 219421. This handbook patch removes all ezjail
documentation from the handbook jail chapter and adds an political correct
entry which is fair to all the jail management utilities in
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218849
--- Comment #28 from Miroslav Lachman <000.f...@quip.cz> ---
(In reply to Jonathan Anderson from comment #27)
I think the opposite way. Or we end up with the same problems as with ezjail,
portupgrade, portmaster etc. now. Some features in ba
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218849
Jonathan Anderson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jonat...@freebsd.org
--- Comme
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218849
--- Comment #26 from Miroslav Lachman <000.f...@quip.cz> ---
(In reply to Thomas Steen Rasmussen / Tykling from comment #25)
Are you serious? Then why Joe provided the idea how to make ezjail survive this
code removal?
Did you read the comme
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218849
Thomas Steen Rasmussen / Tykling changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tho...@gibfest.d
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218849
Jamie Gritton changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ja...@freebsd.org
--- Comment #24
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218849
--- Comment #23 from Miroslav Lachman <000.f...@quip.cz> ---
(In reply to Warner Losh from comment #22)
I think it turns in to bikeshed now. Are we talking about rc.conf variables to
configure jails or about this as dependency for ezjail?
N
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218849
Warner Losh changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||i...@freebsd.org
--- Comment #22 fro
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218849
--- Comment #21 from Miroslav Lachman <000.f...@quip.cz> ---
(In reply to Julian Elischer from comment #20)
Why?
To miss the opportunity to remove deprecated code for the next major release
again?
Then why we even put warnings to outdated c
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218849
--- Comment #20 from Julian Elischer ---
previous comment shoudl have read "I strongly request that the bug be closed
again".
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
__
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218849
Julian Elischer changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jul...@freebsd.org
--- Comment #
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218849
Ngie Cooper changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|Closed |Open
Flags|
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218849
Brooks Davis changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |Works As Intended
C
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218849
--- Comment #16 from Joe Barbish ---
This is my objection to waiting for 12.0 before doing this. When 10.0 came out
the removal of the rc.conf method was scheduled to happen at 11.0. Now 3+ years
later 11.0 is out and the rc.conf method is
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218849
--- Comment #15 from Mathieu Arnold ---
(In reply to Joe Barbish from comment #9)
> I see no benefit to dropping rc.conf jail support on a major release over a
> minor release. I both cases you are going to suffer the same consequences of
>
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218849
--- Comment #14 from rai...@ultra-secure.de ---
I think the PTB (powers that be) ultimately decided that it's not in the
interest of the project to have a tool and (and possibly an API) in base to
create jails a la ezjail.
At least, that's
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218849
erdge...@erdgeist.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||erdge...@erdgeist.org
--- C
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218849
--- Comment #12 from Ngie Cooper ---
For the sake of maintaining POLA, I recommend not breaking it on a dot-release
and instead throw the switch on ^/head. I am very much in agreement there with
grembo@.
I think it would be a great idea to
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218849
Conrad Meyer changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||c...@freebsd.org
--- Comment #11 fr
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218849
--- Comment #10 from Michael Gmelin ---
(In reply to Joe Barbish from comment #9)
I tried to give you feedback from real world installations and real world
upgrade procedures, as you claimed ezjail isn't relevant any more.
Even though I a
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218849
--- Comment #9 from Joe Barbish ---
I see no benefit to dropping rc.conf jail support on a major release over a
minor release. I both cases you are going to suffer the same consequences of
NOT heeding the warning you have been getting for t
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218849
--- Comment #8 from Michael Gmelin ---
(In reply to Joe Barbish from comment #7)
As maintainer of sysutils/qjail you might look at this like it. I just know
that we run hundreds of jails using ezjail and breaking that in anything but a
maj
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218849
--- Comment #7 from Joe Barbish ---
In reply to comment # 3 which states
"But I believe the number of ezjail-jails is significant."
This is un-true, since 10.0 was published many ezjail users have been moving to
qjail because qjail uses
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218849
Michael Gmelin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gre...@freebsd.org
--- Comment #6
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218849
Chris Hutchinson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||portmas...@bsdforge.com
--- Com
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218849
--- Comment #4 from Miroslav Lachman <000.f...@quip.cz> ---
There is nothing special on jails created by ezjail so the configuration can be
converted very easily. I have my own solution for jails with very similar
structure and nullfs mount
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218849
--- Comment #3 from rai...@ultra-secure.de ---
Fair enough.
But I believe the number of ezjail-jails is significant.
Also, as you can see, until now (11.0) it's the 3rd-party tool recommended by
the FreeBSD project itself (if you take the
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218849
Miroslav Lachman <000.f...@quip.cz> changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||000.f...@quip.
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218849
rai...@ultra-secure.de changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rai...@ultra-secure.de
---
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218849
Bug ID: 218849
Summary: Remove rc.conf jail configuration via jail_* variables
Product: Base System
Version: 11.0-RELEASE
Hardware: Any
OS: Any
Status: New
35 matches
Mail list logo
