David Demelier wrote:
Hello there,
I wanted to use rctl within a jail to add more fine grained setting for
some users, and default ones to. But it does not seem to work. Is it
supported? Do we need to add a special flag to the jail creation?
# rctl -a loginclass:default:maxproc:deny=30
rctl
On 22.09.2013 15:45, Fbsd8 wrote:
> David Demelier wrote:
>> Hello there,
>>
>> I wanted to use rctl within a jail to add more fine grained setting for
>> some users, and default ones to. But it does not seem to work. Is it
>> supported? Do we need to add a
Hello there,
I wanted to use rctl within a jail to add more fine grained setting for
some users, and default ones to. But it does not seem to work. Is it
supported? Do we need to add a special flag to the jail creation?
# rctl -a loginclass:default:maxproc:deny=30
rctl: rctl_add_rule: Operation
On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 7:53 PM, Alejandro Imass wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 5:07 PM, Patrick wrote:
>> On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 12:07 PM, Alejandro Imass
>> wrote:
>>> On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 5:03 AM, Frank Leonhardt wrote:
On 29/08/2013 09:52, Frank Leonhardt wrote:
>
>>>
>
> [.
On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 5:07 PM, Patrick wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 12:07 PM, Alejandro Imass wrote:
>> On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 5:03 AM, Frank Leonhardt wrote:
>>> On 29/08/2013 09:52, Frank Leonhardt wrote:
>>
[...]
> Aliases should have a netmask of 255.255.255.255. What you seein
On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 12:07 PM, Alejandro Imass wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 5:03 AM, Frank Leonhardt wrote:
>> On 29/08/2013 09:52, Frank Leonhardt wrote:
>>>
>
> Hi Frank thanks for taking the time to try to replicate this. Here is
> all the detailed info
>
> 8.1-RELEASE
>
> em0: flags=88
On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 5:03 AM, Frank Leonhardt wrote:
> On 29/08/2013 09:52, Frank Leonhardt wrote:
>>
Hi Frank thanks for taking the time to try to replicate this. Here is
all the detailed info
8.1-RELEASE
em0: flags=8843 metric 0 mtu 1500
options=209b
ether 00:31:88:bd:b9:3
wrote:
[...]
Sorry guys - I had not intention of upsetting the EzJail fan club!
No worries there I just think it's an awesome tool. We used plain old
jails before, and we even went through the "service jail" path once,
but EzJail is a lot more than just lightweight easy-to-use jail
of upsetting the EzJail fan club!
No worries there I just think it's an awesome tool. We used plain old
jails before, and we even went through the "service jail" path once,
but EzJail is a lot more than just lightweight easy-to-use jailing.
The fact remains that I've tr
[...]
> Sorry guys - I had not intention of upsetting the EzJail fan club!
>
No worries there I just think it's an awesome tool. We used plain old
jails before, and we even went through the "service jail" path once,
but EzJail is a lot more than just lightweight easy-to-use jai
ails. On the host
> system, yes, but when a jail is bound to a particular IP, outbound
> connections originate from that bound IP. At least they do for me in
> all of my experience. Still wondering if you're using NAT with your
> jails, as that could change things.
>
Nope, no NAT
can confirm that you shouldn't be seeing this behaviour because I don't. I
don't use EzJail - i prefer "vi". Seriously, setting up a jail is very
straightforward anyway, and when I tried ezjail I found it was doing stuff I
didn't like, so dropped it early on. It was a lo
t;
>>
>> (Tidied up so all now bottom posted)
>>
>> I can confirm that you shouldn't be seeing this behaviour because I don't. I
>> don't use EzJail - i prefer "vi". Seriously, setting up a jail is very
>> straightforward anyway, and wh
7;t be seeing this behaviour because I don't. I
> don't use EzJail - i prefer "vi". Seriously, setting up a jail is very
> straightforward anyway, and when I tried ezjail I found it was doing stuff I
> didn't like, so dropped it early on. It was a long time ago an
On28/08/2013 00:19, Patrick wrote:
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 3:42 PM, Alejandro Imass wrote:
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 6:28 PM, Patrick wrote:
That's not the behaviour I see. My jail has a private and public IP.
Hi Patrick, thanks for your reply.
The issue is actually more basic and
Hi Alejandro,
That's how I've got things setup, too, but I'm not seeing the same
behaviour. So I was wondering if there was something different about
your setup such as using NAT to allow a jail with a private IP to
access the internet at large.
Patrick
On Tue, Aug 27,
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 6:28 PM, Patrick wrote:
> That's not the behaviour I see. My jail has a private and public IP.
>
Hi Patrick, thanks for your reply.
The issue is actually more basic and it's because the same network
card has multiple IPs on the same subnet so the rout
That's not the behaviour I see. My jail has a private and public IP.
$ ifconfig bce1
bce1: flags=8843 metric 0 mtu 1500
options=c01bb
ether a4:ba:db:29:7a:1b
inet 192.168.42.23 netmask 0x broadcast 192.168.42.23
media: Ethernet autoselect (1000
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 4:59 PM, Alejandro Imass wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have a machine with several public IPs on the same NIC and I bound
> one of those IPs to a jail created with EzJail. Suppose the scenario
> is something like this:
>
> em0
> 190.100.100.1
> 19
Hi,
I have a machine with several public IPs on the same NIC and I bound
one of those IPs to a jail created with EzJail. Suppose the scenario
is something like this:
em0
190.100.100.1
190.100.100.2
190.100.100.3
190.100.100.4
In the jail we are bound only to 190.100.100.4
The default router is
:
[...]
You can specify different params for each jail using _parameters, for
example:
jail_jailname_params="allow.chflags=1 allow.sysvipc=1"
Sorry, my mistake - it should be jail_jailname_parameters= of course.
--
regards, Maciej Suszko.
Thanks for your message,
However, I could not
e1 database in /usr/local/pgsql/data/base/1 ... FATAL:
>>> could not create shared memory segment: Function not implemented
>>
>>
>> I'll look into this by creating a new jail for PostgreSQL 9.2 when I
>> get home.
>>
>
> While it is currently i
On Tue, 13 Aug 2013 07:53-0400, Fbsd8 wrote:
> What 9.3 are you talking about
> 9.2-RC1 is the newest available.
> Is 9.3 a typo and you really mean 9.2??
PostgreSQL 9.3beta2, you'll find it in ports as
databases/postgresql93-server, etc.
http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/What's_new_in_Postgr
Terje Elde wrote:
On 12. aug. 2013, at 19.46, Trond Endrestøl wrote:
If you start the jail manually using jail(8), then /etc/jail.conf
comes into play, whereas the lines in /etc/rc.conf is used during
automatic startup of the jails when the host is rebooted. The whole
arrangement seems
Shane Ambler wrote:
On 12/08/2013 21:39, Trond Endrestøl wrote:
While it is currently in beta maybe you could also try 9.3 and verify
that the shared memory update works or eliminates this configuration?
If you missed the change, 9.3 is implementing shared memory using mmap.
What 9.3 are
On 12. aug. 2013, at 19.46, Trond Endrestøl wrote:
> If you start the jail manually using jail(8), then /etc/jail.conf
> comes into play, whereas the lines in /etc/rc.conf is used during
> automatic startup of the jails when the host is rebooted. The whole
> arrangement seems
On 13. aug. 2013, at 06:14, Shane Ambler wrote:
> If you missed the change, 9.3 is implementing shared memory using mmap.
But still using sysvipc for some locks/mutexes, so doesn't allow you to run
"sysvipc-free".
Terje
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd
I'll look into this by creating a new jail for PostgreSQL 9.2 when I
get home.
While it is currently in beta maybe you could also try 9.3 and verify
that the shared memory update works or eliminates this configuration?
If you missed the change, 9.3 is implementing shared memory
iej Suszko :
> > >> > Maciej Suszko wrote:
> > >> > [...]
> > >> >>
> > >> >> You can specify different params for each jail using _parameters, for
> > >> >> example:
> > >> >>
> > >> >> jail_jail
David Demelier wrote:
> 2013/8/11 Maciej Suszko :
> > Maciej Suszko wrote:
> > [...]
> >>
> >> You can specify different params for each jail using _parameters,
> >> for example:
> >>
> >> jail_jailname_params="allow.ch
On Mon, 12 Aug 2013 13:57+0200, David Demelier wrote:
> 2013/8/12 Trond Endrestøl :
> > On Mon, 12 Aug 2013 12:40+0200, David Demelier wrote:
> >
> >> 2013/8/11 Maciej Suszko :
> >> > Maciej Suszko wrote:
> >> > [...]
> >> >&g
2013/8/12 Trond Endrestøl :
> On Mon, 12 Aug 2013 12:40+0200, David Demelier wrote:
>
>> 2013/8/11 Maciej Suszko :
>> > Maciej Suszko wrote:
>> > [...]
>> >>
>> >> You can specify different params for each jail using _parameters, for
>>
On Mon, 12 Aug 2013 12:40+0200, David Demelier wrote:
> 2013/8/11 Maciej Suszko :
> > Maciej Suszko wrote:
> > [...]
> >>
> >> You can specify different params for each jail using _parameters, for
> >> example:
> >>
> >> jail_jailnam
2013/8/11 Maciej Suszko :
> Maciej Suszko wrote:
> [...]
>>
>> You can specify different params for each jail using _parameters, for
>> example:
>>
>> jail_jailname_params="allow.chflags=1 allow.sysvipc=1"
>
> Sorry, my mistake - it should be
Maciej Suszko wrote:
[...]
>
> You can specify different params for each jail using _parameters, for
> example:
>
> jail_jailname_params="allow.chflags=1 allow.sysvipc=1"
Sorry, my mistake - it should be jail_jailname_parameters= of course.
--
regards, Macie
David Demelier wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I would like to enable sysvipc only for one jail (defined in
> /etc/rc.conf). It's possible with jail.conf but this is not supported
> with jails listed in /etc/rc.conf.
>
> Is it possible without using the global jail_sysvipc_allow ?
Hi,
I would like to enable sysvipc only for one jail (defined in
/etc/rc.conf). It's possible with jail.conf but this is not supported
with jails listed in /etc/rc.conf.
Is it possible without using the global jail_sysvipc_allow ?
Cheers,
--
Demelier
--On 07 August 2013 12:23 +0100 Arthur Chance wrote:
I don't think the old /etc/rc.conf way of handling jails lets you do it,
but the latest version of jail(8) introduced /etc/jail.conf and you
should be able to add "jid = ;" parameters in there.
Thanks - I'll check t
Karl Pielorz wrote:
Hi,
I have a number of jailed systems running - and I've been setting up
ipfw rules for them.
This is on FBSD 9.1.
'ipfw' lets you match on traffic to/from a Jail ID (JID) - however every
time jails get started / stopped their JID changes [thus breakin
On 07/08/2013 09:28, Karl Pielorz wrote:
I have a number of jailed systems running - and I've been setting up
ipfw rules for them.
This is on FBSD 9.1.
'ipfw' lets you match on traffic to/from a Jail ID (JID) - however every
time jails get started / stopped their JID changes [th
Hi,
I have a number of jailed systems running - and I've been setting up ipfw
rules for them.
This is on FBSD 9.1.
'ipfw' lets you match on traffic to/from a Jail ID (JID) - however every
time jails get started / stopped their JID changes [thus breaking the
firewall rules]
; > It looks like everything is connected properly.
> >
> > A couple thoughts off the top of my head:
> >
> > a. Did you enable promiscuous mode on rl0 via ngctl? (in your script
> > perhaps?)
> >
> > b. Have you tried giving ngeth0 a new MAC address? (
Hello list.
Trying to get my script to work that creates a netgraph network for a
jail(8) vnet jail. Every thing seems to work, but from inside of the
started vnet jail I can not ping the public internet. The host can ping
the public internet so the problem has to be in the netgraph script
giving ngeth0 a new MAC address? (I do this through ngctl
too, but I imagine ifconfig from within the jail could achieve the same thing)
--
Devin
Yes I enabled promiscuous mode and setautosrc 0 on rl0 via ngctl.
I can find no documentation on why this is done. Can you point me to some?
Yes I
};
"9.ether" -- "5.link2";
};
I rendered your output by saving it in a file ("joe.dot") and then running:
dot -Tsvg -o joe.svg < joe.dot
I then uploaded "joe.svg" to my website:
http://druidbsd.sf.net/download/joe.svg
Compare your output to any o
Teske, Devin wrote:
Sorry for top-post, but just wanted to add a quick note:
The output of "ngctl dot" would be very helpful to others in debugging your
setup.
graph netgraph {
edge [ weight = 1.0 ];
node [ shape = record, fontsize = 12 ] {
"1" [ label = "{rl0
sure would appreciate giving this console log a look over for
> errors. My netgraph knowledge level is not sufficient to see what is
> wrong. The goal is to run this script to setup and break down a netgraph
> network for a single vnet jail at a time. rl0 is the real nic interface
>
single vnet jail at a time. rl0 is the real nic interface
device name of the nic facing the internet. This box is on my lan and
the gateway box does NAT for all lan boxes. The host running this script
can ping the internet ok.
Thank you very much for your help.
The host's kernel has modules
Hello questions list
I am using jail(8) trying to get a functional vimage environment on my
9.1-RELEASE system. My PC only has a single real NIC facing the public
internet. My goal is to be able to have multiple vimage jails, each with
their own epairXa epairXb and bridgeX where the "
On Thu, 04 Apr 2013 19:50:40 -0500
Joshua Isom wrote:
> Considering Debian's ported the "standard Linux userland" to the FreeBSD
> kernel, I'm wondering if it's possible/practical to use Debian inside of
> a jail instead of a Linux CentOS jail, which ha
Hi!
Joshua Isom writes:
> Considering Debian's ported the "standard Linux userland" to the
> FreeBSD kernel, I'm wondering if it's possible/practical to use Debian
> inside of a jail instead of a Linux CentOS jail, which has been
> documented. I know some
Considering Debian's ported the "standard Linux userland" to the FreeBSD
kernel, I'm wondering if it's possible/practical to use Debian inside of
a jail instead of a Linux CentOS jail, which has been documented. I
know some applications are linux specific, but are th
On Tue, 2 Apr 2013 01:00:44 -0400, Stephen Cook wrote:
> On 4/1/2013 5:23 AM, Ian Smith wrote:
Actually, I forwarded a message that Joe posted
to -jail and -ports. Proper attribution is what this issue's all about.
It's been pointed out to me privately that cross-posting is fro
On 4/1/2013 5:23 AM, Ian Smith wrote:
One does not have to be a lawyer to know the lack of any license verbiage
embedded in computer programs released to the public becomes property of public
domain forever. Putting license verbiage on your next port version is
unenforceable because it's already
...@freebsd.org
Subject: Re:qjail fork attribution was Handbook Jail Chapter rewrite available
for critique
Dirk Engling wrote:
> Dear JoeB,
>
> since you just threatened me via private email to expose my evil plans
> of preventing your ubercool project from taking FreeBSD by storm, I
Paul Macdonald wrote on 28.03.2013 11:46:
this port upgrades fine on the host system but not under a jail..
FreeBSD 9.1-RELEASE FreeBSD 9.1-RELEASE #0 r243825: Tue Dec 4 09:23:10
UTC 2012 r...@farrell.cse.buffalo.edu:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC amd64
config.status: executing depfiles
this port upgrades fine on the host system but not under a jail..
FreeBSD 9.1-RELEASE FreeBSD 9.1-RELEASE #0 r243825: Tue Dec 4 09:23:10
UTC 2012 r...@farrell.cse.buffalo.edu:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC amd64
config.status: executing depfiles commands
sed: 2: "
s/^include
Joe, your mailer dropped -questions from the ccs on your response.
Fixed, Ian
-- Forwarded message --
Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2013 18:12:18 -0400
From: Fbsd8
To: freebsd-j...@freebsd.org
Cc: Ian Smith , Dirk Engling
Subject: Re: Handbook Jail Chapter rewrite available for critique
ce
> to qjail: http://svnweb.freebsd.org/doc?view=revision&revision=40900
>
Never seen it before. First time I read about service jails it wasn't
there. Further to my point doesn't it make more sense to mention them
under "16.5.2 High-Level Administrative Tools in the
Mon May 28 20:02:46 2007 UTC, which section
was just 6 weeks ago updated with a (preceding) similar port reference
to qjail: http://svnweb.freebsd.org/doc?view=revision&revision=40900
[..]
> NOW some things start to make sense to me, when I posted a problem
> with EzJail here last
to EzJail. We use flavours extensively and constantly
derive jails from others and move jails between servers, much like if
we were using VMWare; it's that easy, or easier, and works every time.
NOW some things start to make sense to me, when I posted a problem
with EzJail here last year
On Tue, 19 Mar 2013 17:53:30 +0100, Dirk Engling wrote:
> On 18.03.13 20:16, s...@tormail.org wrote:
>
> > to configure things themselves. In my experience, ezjail is a much better
> > solution. I also see that you are the maintainer/author of qjail and like
> > to shovel your opinion as the
useful doc，greate job！
find a mybe copy/past mistake in 16.7.1：
> *exec.stop* This is the normal script used to *start *the jail.
should be：
*exec.stop* This is the normal script used to *stop *the jail.
regards,
2013/3/19 Fbsd8
> To all interested parties;
>
> I have c
On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 6:45 PM, Robert Huff wrote:
>
> Isaac (.ike) Levy writes:
>
> > Pretty heavy cross-posting here, could you perhaps reign this in
> > to the freebsd-jail@ list, where it can be discussed in-context?
> > This will help keep the noise down.
&g
Isaac (.ike) Levy writes:
> Pretty heavy cross-posting here, could you perhaps reign this in
> to the freebsd-jail@ list, where it can be discussed in-context?
> This will help keep the noise down.
It will also keep down the signal from people who use or are
interested in j
Pretty heavy cross-posting here, could you perhaps reign this in to the
freebsd-jail@ list, where it can be discussed in-context? This will help keep
the noise down.
On Mar 18, 2013, at 12:57 PM, Fbsd8 wrote:
> To all interested parties;
>
> I have completed the final draft of
To all interested parties;
I have completed the final draft of the total rewrite of FreeBSD's
handbook Chapter 16 on Jails.
Before submitting my work for submission to the documentation group for
insertion in the handbook I am looking for critique of the work to find
errors in concept, wrong
k about the new jail.conf parameter cpuset.id from jail(8)?
Seems to me it's a way to dedicate one or more CPUs to a single jail for
increased jail performance. Really the opposite of limiting cpu
resources to a jail.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.o
; > Please do share with us.
>
> Ok I rephrase my question. How do I install freebsd 4.9 in a jail on 8.3
> amd64.
Step 1. Download the following files/directories...
bin/
catpages/
cdrom.inf
compat1x/
compat22/
compat3x/
compat4x/
crypto/
dict/
doc/
games/
info/
manpages/
proflibs/
fro
On Fri, 01 Mar 2013 09:52:41 -0600, wrote:
Read that all ready and left me with more question than answers.
Its experimental and has to be compiled into the kernel.
Need solutions that are provided as part of the base system.
Such as a loadable kernel module.
Can not be risking the security of
Mark Felder wrote:
On Fri, 01 Mar 2013 08:38:05 -0600, wrote:
Is there anything in 9.1 to Limit jail CPU & memory resources?
https://wiki.freebsd.org/Hierarchical_Resource_Limits
Read that all ready and left me with more question than answers.
Its experimental and has to be compiled
On Fri, 01 Mar 2013 08:38:05 -0600, wrote:
Is there anything in 9.1 to Limit jail CPU & memory resources?
https://wiki.freebsd.org/Hierarchical_Resource_Limits
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/list
Is there anything in 9.1 to Limit jail CPU & memory resources?
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
4box
Then just configure the jail and fire it up. Of course, these are vnet jails.
Further instructions on http://druidbsd.sf.net/vimage.shtml with my vimage
package here: http://druidbsd.sf.net/download.shtml#vimage
===
#!/bin/sh
if [ "$( id -u )" != "0" ]; then
echo &
2013-02-26 15:18, Teske, Devin skrev:
Yes, this is possible.
When I get into work, I'll share with you the recipe
Please do share with us.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To u
Bernt Hansson wrote:
I would like to install an old version of freebsd let's say 4.6 in a
jail. Is that possible.
Host is 8.3-stable amd64
Things like ps won't run, but you can copy static binaries from host:/rescue to
jail:/{bin,sbin} as appropriate and that helps a lot.
I just i
Yes, this is possible.
When I get into work, I'll share with you the recipe (I have a script called
"update4.sh" which I run after building [or rsync'ing] a 4.x box to an 8.x box
to become a vimage; note that I didn't say "jail" -- 4.x runs better as a VNET
Hello list!
I would like to install an old version of freebsd let's say 4.6 in a
jail. Is that possible.
Host is 8.3-stable amd64
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questio
t; ipv4_addrs_re0="10.0.0.254/24 10.0.0.1-5/24"
> route_jaillan0="-net 10.0.0.0/24 10.0.0.254"
> static_routes="jaillan0"
>
> Don't recall where I got that from but think it was an easy way to alias
> a number of ip's whereas ifconfig__alias0 set
r of ip's whereas ifconfig__alias0 sets one ip at a time
and is also deprecated.
If you use jail_NAME_ip="iface|addr" does this mean you don't have ip
addresses aliased to the iface on startup and they get aliased as the
jail starts? That would be why sshd isn't bound to t
> -Original Message-
> From: owner-freebsd-questi...@freebsd.org [mailto:owner-freebsd-
> questi...@freebsd.org] On Behalf Of d...@safeport.com
> Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2013 11:00 AM
> To: Shane Ambler
> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Bernt Hansson
>
n the base system,
which includes the aliased ip's for your jails. This is represented by the
*:22 from sockstat. When you start the jail it can't start sshd because the
base already has that address/port in use.
In /etc/ssh/sshd_config comment out the ListenAddress 0.0.0.0 and
Liste
iased ip's for your jails. This is
represented by the *:22 from sockstat. When you start the jail it can't
start sshd because the base already has that address/port in use.
In /etc/ssh/sshd_config comment out the ListenAddress 0.0.0.0 and
ListenAddress :: then add ListenAddress 10.
-02-20 17:23, Teske, Devin wrote:
On Wed, 20 Feb 2013, Bernt Hansson wrote:
Hello list!
I dont seem to get net working in a test jail.
These I've tried;
ftp, fetch, telnet
They time out.
Ssh sort of work.
32bit# ssh 10.0.0.3
ssh_askpass: exec(/usr/local/bin/ssh-askpass): No such fi
Feb 2013, Bernt Hansson wrote:
Hello list!
I dont seem to get net working in a test jail.
These I've tried;
ftp, fetch, telnet
They time out.
Ssh sort of work.
32bit# ssh 10.0.0.3
ssh_askpass: exec(/usr/local/bin/ssh-askpass): No such file or
directory
Host key verification failed.
ja
:
Hello list!
I dont seem to get net working in a test jail.
These I've tried;
ftp, fetch, telnet
They time out.
Ssh sort of work.
32bit# ssh 10.0.0.3
ssh_askpass: exec(/usr/local/bin/ssh-askpass): No such file or
directory
Host key verification failed.
jail is 8.3-STABLE i386 GENERIC
ho
in a test jail.
These I've tried;
ftp, fetch, telnet
They time out.
Ssh sort of work.
32bit# ssh 10.0.0.3
ssh_askpass: exec(/usr/local/bin/ssh-askpass): No such file or
directory
Host key verification failed.
jail is 8.3-STABLE i386 GENERIC
host is FreeBSD 8.3-STABLE amd64 GENERIC
I&#
:
Hello list!
I dont seem to get net working in a test jail.
These I've tried;
ftp, fetch, telnet
They time out.
Ssh sort of work.
32bit# ssh 10.0.0.3
ssh_askpass: exec(/usr/local/bin/ssh-askpass): No such file or
directory
Host key verification failed.
jail is 8.3-STABLE i386 GENERIC
working in a test jail.
These I've tried;
ftp, fetch, telnet
They time out.
Ssh sort of work.
32bit# ssh 10.0.0.3
ssh_askpass: exec(/usr/local/bin/ssh-askpass): No such file or
directory
Host key verification failed.
jail is 8.3-STABLE i386 GENERIC
host is FreeBSD 8.3-STABLE amd64 GENERIC
llo list!
> >>>>
> >>>> I dont seem to get net working in a test jail.
> >>>>
> >>>> These I've tried;
> >>>>
> >>>> ftp, fetch, telnet
> >>>>
> >>>> They time out.
> &
On Wed, 20 Feb 2013, Bernt Hansson wrote:
> On 2013-02-20 17:23, Teske, Devin wrote:
> > On Wed, 20 Feb 2013, Bernt Hansson wrote:
> >
> >> Hello list!
> >>
> >> I dont seem to get net working in a test jail.
> >>
> >> These I&#x
On 20/02/2013 18:23, Bernt Hansson wrote:
The ID did change, didn't know about that, thank you.
But still, sshd isn't running in the jail
32bit# ps ax
PID TT STAT TIME COMMAND
2385 ?? IsJ0:00,00 sendmail: Queue runner@00:30:00 for
/var/spool/clientmqueue (sendma
On 02/20/2013 19:42, Bernt Hansson wrote:
On 2013-02-20 17:23, Teske, Devin wrote:
On Wed, 20 Feb 2013, Bernt Hansson wrote:
Hello list!
I dont seem to get net working in a test jail.
These I've tried;
ftp, fetch, telnet
They time out.
Ssh sort of work.
32bit# ssh 10.0.0.3
ssh_as
On Wed, 20 Feb 2013, Bernt Hansson wrote:
> Hello list!
>
> I dont seem to get net working in a test jail.
>
> These I've tried;
>
> ftp, fetch, telnet
>
> They time out.
>
> Ssh sort of work.
>
> 32bit# ssh 10.0.0.3
> ssh_askpass: exec(/usr/lo
schrieb Harald Schmalzbauer am 14.02.2013 14:18 (localtime):
> schrieb Fbsd8 am 06.02.2013 17:57 (localtime):
>> Fleuriot Damien wrote:
>>> Running 8.3 here and the answer is no.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Feb 6, 2013, at 5:39 PM, Fbsd8 wrote:
>>>
&g
schrieb Fbsd8 am 06.02.2013 17:57 (localtime):
> Fleuriot Damien wrote:
>> Running 8.3 here and the answer is no.
>>
>>
>> On Feb 6, 2013, at 5:39 PM, Fbsd8 wrote:
>>
>>> Is there a way to set these MIBs
>>> on a per jail bases?
>>>
On Feb 6, 2013, at 5:57 PM, Fbsd8 wrote:
> Fleuriot Damien wrote:
>> Running 8.3 here and the answer is no.
>> On Feb 6, 2013, at 5:39 PM, Fbsd8 wrote:
>>> Is there a way to set these MIBs
>>> on a per jail bases?
>>>
>>> allow.mount.nullfs
Fleuriot Damien wrote:
Running 8.3 here and the answer is no.
On Feb 6, 2013, at 5:39 PM, Fbsd8 wrote:
Is there a way to set these MIBs
on a per jail bases?
allow.mount.nullfs
allow.raw_sockets
cpuset.id
securelevel
Rereading the "man jail" for 9.1 talks about securelevel
Running 8.3 here and the answer is no.
On Feb 6, 2013, at 5:39 PM, Fbsd8 wrote:
> Is there a way to set these MIBs
> on a per jail bases?
>
> allow.mount.nullfs
> allow.raw_sockets
> cpuset.id
> securelevel
> ___
> fr
Is there a way to set these MIBs
on a per jail bases?
allow.mount.nullfs
allow.raw_sockets
cpuset.id
securelevel
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to
1 - 100 of 1377 matches
Mail list logo
