Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2000 13:12:02 -0800 (PST) From: Doug Ambrisko <ambrisko@whistle.com> To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk> Cc: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org>, Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com>, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Neat kernel development environment. Message-ID: <200003312112.NAA18171@whistle.com> In-Reply-To: <5391.954530417@critter.freebsd.dk> from Poul-Henning Kamp at "Mar 31, 2000 09:20:17 pm"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Poul-Henning Kamp writes: | In message <Pine.BSF.4.10.10003311103010.23705-100000@InterJet.elischer.org>, Julian El | ischer writes: | | >Oh? can you run a kernel in a jail for debugging? | | No, not quite yet, but what IBM bragged about the 41k linuxes for | was for what jails do for you. Nope not quite. Since you could actually crash the kernel in the VM/Linux session and the others are still going. Crash the kernel in a jail and all sessions are toast. Note I do like jail on FreeBSD one thing that would be nice with jail is if the IP address for the jail disappeared from the non-jail machine. For example sendmail doesn't like to send mail to the jail session if it sees the jail's IP is one of its own IPs. Sort of like, I'm already there why bother and it could cause mail looping under mis-configuration. This isn't a problem for the IBM type solution or vmware. Then with IBM the machine can disable a bad CPU and call home for a fix. None of the session are bothered (except performance) assuming you have more then one CPU working. Maybe we heard different bragging. Doug A. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200003312112.NAA18171>