On Sun, Aug 03, 2003 at 04:11:12PM +0200, Jens Rehsack wrote:On 04.08.2003 01:09, Mike Makonnen wrote:
the patch works for me very well. I've checked what's been done and had only small recommendations:
- Wouldn't it be better to configure the devfs rules by /etc/devfs.conf or is it impossible?
- Even it would be a good thing, if I could specify a ruleset for each jail, and fallback to devfs_ruleset_jail if no jail_example_devfs_ruleset is specified?
Ok. Here's a retooled patch. It now includes a devfs rule specification format that we can even use in the general case (i.e. - for /dev). The default rules for a jail are included in it. It's in etc/defaults/devfs.rules and should be self-explanatory.
I also put back Scott's code in rc.d/jail for handlind rulesets for individual jails. But I kept the default jail ruleset hard-coded. I don't see the poing of creating yet another knob for it. If a user doesn't want the default that's what the individual knobs for the jails are there for :)
Let me know how it goes.
> the patch is attached this time.
Hi Mike,
sorry that testing took a while, but it failed completely first time on my machine I didn't find the time to debug.
1st: you have a typo in etc/rc.d/jail sed "/\[-z/\[ -z/"
2nd: you include the 'devfs_ruleset_hide' several times, and each time the devfs call for it hides all previous unhidden. So you have to remove the 'add include $devfs_ruleset_hide' from the unhiding rulesets.
3rd: I don't know why, but I had your etc/default/devfs.rules content 5 times in my etc/defaults/debfs.rules The parsing subr fails with this content and so the jails didn't came up. So it was my fault (even I cannot explain, 'cause I removed /usr/src/etc before I cvsup'ed and applied the patch).
By the way, now it works. Great step for flexible jails!!!
Jens
_______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
