Date: Thu, 9 Oct 2003 22:19:46 -0300 (ADT) From: "Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@hub.org> To: Lewis Thompson <purple@lewiz.info> Cc: Kenny Freeman <kennyf@pchg.net> Subject: Re: Jail FS questions. Message-ID: <20031009221555.W28590@ganymede.hub.org> In-Reply-To: <20031010005515.GH587@lewiz.org> References: <20030803200948.GA10712@lewiz.org> <200310091700.09658.kennyf@pchg.net> <20031009211629.T28590@ganymede.hub.org> <20031009212824.Q28590@ganymede.hub.org> <20031010005515.GH587@lewiz.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> 5.1-RELEASE, latest patches. I think this might be the problem. I'm > having vinum issues too. 'K, haven't started to play with 5.1 yet, since its still label'd as "not production quality" ... or at least it was when I asked before installing my last server a month or so ago ... > > permissions: do you have a way I can "test this"? > > If I use unionfs as the ``base'' for the jail then every directory seems > to be automagically owned by the person that mounted it (i.e. root). > This causes me problems for stuff like mailspool, etc. I think this is > the way unionfs works though, not an issue I am personally having. Ah, neat ... I'd never noticed that before ... its never affected anything as far as I've experienced though, but we don't unionfs mount /var, as there is a bug in unionfs dealing with sockets that mounting /var causing the server to crash repeatedly ...
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20031009221555.W28590>