Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2006 18:07:01 +0000 (GMT) From: Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org> To: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com> Cc: erik.udo@gmail.com, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org, olli@lurza.secnetix.de Subject: Re: Init.c, making it chroot Message-ID: <20061230180625.B50974@fledge.watson.org> In-Reply-To: <20061230.103532.1784646290.imp@bsdimp.com> References: <200612301119.kBUBJNno062104@lurza.secnetix.de> <20061230123256.V18740@fledge.watson.org> <20061230.103532.1784646290.imp@bsdimp.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, 30 Dec 2006, M. Warner Losh wrote: > In message: <20061230123256.V18740@fledge.watson.org> > Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org> writes: > : Mounting a second devfs instance is undesirable for a number of > : reasons, not least that you end up with an extra file system > : floating around (although not reachable via the name space). It's > : certainly not disastrous though. > > At work, we have a build server. Our build environment is a chroot'd area > that allows us to insultate the products we're building from the host os's > files completely. We have to have a devfs entry in each of these chroots. > We often see dozens of devfs instances mounted on our 6.2 build boxes w/o > ill effect. We've done this as far back as 5.3. Yes, this is certainly a supported configuration, as it's also used extensively with jail. Robert N M Watson Computer Laboratory University of Cambridge
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20061230180625.B50974>