On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 6:20 PM, Leonid Isaev wrote:
> AFAIK, but this can be wrong, the real problem with NM is not having read-only
> resolv.conf, but protecting /etc/hosts...
I don't see a problem with read-only /etc/hosts. It shouldn't contain
anything other than "::1 localhost" anyway. Use ns
On Mon, 9 Jul 2012 10:51:11 +0200
Tom Gundersen wrote:
>[...]
>
> What should work (but might not!): /etc and /usr (and /lib, /sbin,
> /bin) should be able to be mounted read-only. I expect you'll have to
> figure out how to deal with /etc/resolv.conf, I wonder if
> NetworkManager has learnt how
> /tmp is a tmpfs for a default Arch install, so you don't need to worry about
> that.
So it is, likely on the clients too and so may not have applied
here anyway.
--
Why not do something good every day and install BOINC.
__
On Monday 09 Jul 2012 10:08:51 you wrote:
> My setup has the nodes mounting root rw, but in practice they never touch it
> except for when I run an upgrade or do some manual configuration, which I
> usually do from a node (because it's easier).
Oh, also, my setup has a separate root shared by the
On Monday 09 Jul 2012 10:11:43 Kevin Chadwick wrote:
> > No experiece at all, but I'd say that /var must be writeable too. Think of
> > it some like the /home of the system, so you should have one per machine
> > in
> > the NFS server.
> And /tmp.
/tmp is a tmpfs for a default Arch install, so you
> > I'd use connman for handling the net connection and it seems to require a
> > writable /var/lib/connman/
> >
>
> No experiece at all, but I'd say that /var must be writeable too. Think of
> it some like the /home of the system, so you should have one per machine in
> the NFS server.
>
> Jus
On 09.07.2012 10:10, Damjan wrote:
> Has anyone done any research on stateless ArchLinux instances.
>
> A stateless Arch would be one where the root filesystem is mounted
> read-only and nothing changes there. Thus it can mounted over network
> (using NFS, NBD and similar) by several, diskless,
On Monday 09 Jul 2012 10:10:07 Damjan wrote:
> Has anyone done any research on stateless ArchLinux instances.
>
> A stateless Arch would be one where the root filesystem is mounted
> read-only and nothing changes there. Thus it can mounted over network
> (using NFS, NBD and similar) by several, di
On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 10:51 AM, Tom Gundersen wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 10:10 AM, Damjan wrote:
>> Has anyone done any research on stateless ArchLinux instances.
>>
>> A stateless Arch would be one where the root filesystem is mounted read-only
>> and nothing changes there. Thus it can mou
On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 10:10 AM, Damjan wrote:
> Has anyone done any research on stateless ArchLinux instances.
>
> A stateless Arch would be one where the root filesystem is mounted read-only
> and nothing changes there. Thus it can mounted over network (using NFS, NBD
> and similar) by several,
On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 10:10 AM, Damjan wrote:
> I'd use connman for handling the net connection and it seems to require a
> writable /var/lib/connman/
>
No experiece at all, but I'd say that /var must be writeable too. Think of
it some like the /home of the system, so you should have one per ma
Has anyone done any research on stateless ArchLinux instances.
A stateless Arch would be one where the root filesystem is mounted
read-only and nothing changes there. Thus it can mounted over network
(using NFS, NBD and similar) by several, diskless, PCs at the same time.
I plan to have per u
12 matches
Mail list logo
