Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2016 10:28:07 +0100 From: Tom Lazar <lists@tomster.org> To: Aristedes Maniatis <ari@ish.com.au> Cc: markham breitbach <markham@ssimicro.com>, freebsd-jail <freebsd-jail@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Jail management Message-ID: <13A9C47A-86FE-4E44-83D6-4736488FB9CC@tomster.org> In-Reply-To: <7b947a1c-824b-193d-3dc3-49d876b21be9@ish.com.au> References: <ff8307f6-1264-30ec-1ef8-ed3b0a18dd84@ish.com.au> <DFFE2BFC-1D53-457D-A4C3-633418D3690D@erdgeist.org> <7b947a1c-824b-193d-3dc3-49d876b21be9@ish.com.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> On 22 Feb 2016, at 09:17, Aristedes Maniatis <ari@ish.com.au> wrote: >=20 > Markham wrote: >=20 > I also discovered iocage which looks quite different and interesting. = I'm still reading about it, but it seems to: another thing you might want to take a look at - given your requirements = and current setup - is jetpack[1] it basically implements the docker approach using zfs and jails as = underlying technology and pretty much replaces (the unstable) solution = of unionfs with its layers based on zfs snapshots. while it seems to be the least mature option discussed in this thread so = far, i think its container approach fills a niche that might fit your = use case very well. having said that, i=92d like to point out, that florian and myself (the = authors of bsdploy) are very open to using saltstack - bsdploy is = designed to be modular and we already have experimental support for it = [2] and the GPL licence of ansible is turning into a bigger annoyance = than expected[3] so we are motivated to continue along that path. just my two cents, cheers, tom =20 [1] https://github.com/3ofcoins/jetpack [2] https://github.com/ployground/ploy_salt = <https://github.com/ployground/ploy_salt>; [3] https://github.com/ployground/bsdploy/issues/75=
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?13A9C47A-86FE-4E44-83D6-4736488FB9CC>