not a good marker from a scripting
> perspective.
Will this prevent all preparations from happening, i.e. will filesystems
be mounted for jails disabled this way?
Although this may work, I think that this looks dirty. I'd really prefer
a "disabled" or "noauto" keyword i
On Tue, Jan 08, 2013 at 12:39:44PM -0800, Devin Teske wrote:
> Maybe giving each of the jails their own networking stack would help?
>
> Do you know about VIMAGE?
>
> I have a boot script that makes it easy to test out this new/experimental
> (yet very stable) feature:
>
> http://druidbsd.sf.ne
thing obviously wrong that I'm doing?
>
> Is it possible that there is some restriction that will not allow me to
> have this configuration?
See jail(8):
ip4.addr
... It is only possible to start
multiple jails with the same IP address, if none of the jails has
more than this single overlapping IP address assigned to itself.
So jails can have the same IP4 address but that has to be the only IP4
address of that jail, otherwise all address must be unique.
Kind regards,
Paul Schenkeveld
___
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"
. So the changes to jexec(8)
> are not needed to fix this specific issue.
You're my hero!
Any idea about MFC?
> Best regards,
> --
> Ed Schouten
> WWW: http://80386.nl/
Paul Schenkeveld
___
freebsd-jail@freebsd.org mailing l
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 02:34:01PM +0200, joris dedieu wrote:
> 2011/8/11 joris dedieu :
> > 2011/8/10 joris dedieu :
> >> 2011/8/9 Paul Schenkeveld :
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> There have been several threads about this issue, some people have come
this problem, it's a real issue to many people. To me it's worth
some $ or EUR to solve this in a clean way.
Kind regards,
Paul Schenkeveld
___
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"
.
Again, I'm not against your enhancements, I'm just worried about
pollution of OS primitives.
With kind regards,
Paul Schenkeveld
[1] Chown/chgrp/chmod are nice examples, I could easily think of at
least a dozen enhancements like only operating on files matching a
specific
nd /home/user[123...] datasets outside the jails, run
samba there with a share called [home] (not to be confused with the
[homes] share that comes with smb.conf.sample) and mount this share
using mount_smbfs inside every jail (from fstab.).
Just my $.02
Regards,
Paul Schenkeveld
___
/tank/jails/smarty0
>
>
> No error messages when starting or stopping centos jail.
> /var/run contains jail_centos.id
> Alias exists on bge0.
>
> So I tried "jexec 4 /bin/bash" figuring jls just isn't showing the centos
> jail for some reason but:
> jexec: jail_attach(4): Invalid argument
>
> Anybody have any idea about what might be happening here?
This usually happens when there are no processes running in the jail to
keep it up. By default, jails started thru rc.d/jail are not persistent.
Try adding something like cron_enable="YES" to rc.conf inside the jail.
Regards,
Paul Schenkeveld
___
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"
start A before B but shutdown B before A. Would it make sense
to reverse the order in which jails are stopped during shutdown by
reversing the nales in $jail_list?
The attached patch reverses $jail_list during shutdown.
Regards,
Paul Schenkeveld
--- etc/rc.d/jail.orig 2009-08-15 14:00
It would not kick in if the application inside the master jail stops
responding.
If you just want to simulate a multi-host network instead of doing
application fail-over then vnet is your best bet.
> Thank you,
> Aaron Weeden
HTH
Paul Schenkeveld
_
11 matches
Mail list logo
