Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2003 09:34:26 -0700 From: Gordon Tetlow <gordont@gnf.org> To: Robert Watson <rwatson@freebsd.org> Cc: Joshua Oreman <oremanj@www.get-linux.org> Subject: Re: current state of the art / best practice for devfs in a jail ? Message-ID: <20030705163426.GO70590@roark.gnf.org> In-Reply-To: <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1030703220654.31430A-100000@fledge.watson.org> References: <20030703173035.GH86503@webserver.get-linux.org> <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1030703220654.31430A-100000@fledge.watson.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--Wj6ursgR4TQyKGvE Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, Jul 03, 2003 at 10:07:57PM -0400, Robert Watson wrote: >=20 > On Thu, 3 Jul 2003, Joshua Oreman wrote: >=20 > > On Thu, Jul 03, 2003 at 04:00:46AM -0700 or thereabouts, Josh Brooks wr= ote: > > >=20 > > > I have been researching the various of ways people add devfs to a jai= l to > > > give the jail certian /dev devices necessary to function ... > >=20 > > Well, all I did was test your research :-) >=20 > Gordon Tetlow (victim CC'd) was, I believe, working on changes to rc.d to > allow automatic construction of jails at boot, and part of that was some > best practice devfs rules for jail. Perhaps he could chime in now? :-) No, that wasn't me. If I had to guess it was either mtm@ or mike@ (or maybe some other Mike in the project). -gordon --Wj6ursgR4TQyKGvE Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQE/Bv4SRu2t9DV9ZfsRAh4CAKC3AdVMlu96VKfDi1A2jQUq0WLhDACgha6y p90Ee15KN7BGZWq9ixGehbE= =Q27w -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Wj6ursgR4TQyKGvE--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030705163426.GO70590>