Re: 10.0-BETA1 ZFS install -- /var/empty read-only

2013-10-23 Thread Allan Jude
On 2013-10-23 09:38, Eric van Gyzen wrote:
> On 10/23/2013 08:30, Kimmo Paasiala wrote:
>> On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 4:29 PM, Kimmo Paasiala  wrote:
>>> On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 4:25 PM, Eric van Gyzen  wrote:
 I just installed 10.0-BETA1 using the [very cool] new automatic ZFS
 option.  I noticed that /var/empty is not mounted read-only.  I suspect
 it could be.  I made it so, and sshd still seemed to work.

 Eric
>>> I don't think there's a standard for how to break down the ZFS pool to
>>> individual datasets. If the install made only a single dataset for
>>> /var you would then effectively get a read-write /var/empty. The
>> *The same applies*
>>
>>> applies if you install on UFS and don't assign a separate filesystem
>>> for /var/empty like the default install does in fact.
> There might not be a standard, but the installer does have a default
> set, which includes a separate filesystem for /var/empty.  I imagine
> this was done specifically to make it read-only.  Since that was not
> done, it seems like an oversight.
>
> Eric
> ___
> freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
You have to be careful with marking the /var/empty read only, if you do
it too soon the extract of base.txz fails.

This might be a good use of Colin Percival's 'firstboot' script

-- 
Allan Jude

___
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"


Re: 10.0-BETA1 ZFS install -- /var/empty read-only

2013-10-23 Thread Eric van Gyzen
On 10/23/2013 08:30, Kimmo Paasiala wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 4:29 PM, Kimmo Paasiala  wrote:
>> On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 4:25 PM, Eric van Gyzen  wrote:
>>> I just installed 10.0-BETA1 using the [very cool] new automatic ZFS
>>> option.  I noticed that /var/empty is not mounted read-only.  I suspect
>>> it could be.  I made it so, and sshd still seemed to work.
>>>
>>> Eric
>> I don't think there's a standard for how to break down the ZFS pool to
>> individual datasets. If the install made only a single dataset for
>> /var you would then effectively get a read-write /var/empty. The
> *The same applies*
>
>> applies if you install on UFS and don't assign a separate filesystem
>> for /var/empty like the default install does in fact.

There might not be a standard, but the installer does have a default
set, which includes a separate filesystem for /var/empty.  I imagine
this was done specifically to make it read-only.  Since that was not
done, it seems like an oversight.

Eric
___
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"


Re: 10.0-BETA1 ZFS install -- /var/empty read-only

2013-10-23 Thread Kimmo Paasiala
On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 4:29 PM, Kimmo Paasiala  wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 4:25 PM, Eric van Gyzen  wrote:
>> I just installed 10.0-BETA1 using the [very cool] new automatic ZFS
>> option.  I noticed that /var/empty is not mounted read-only.  I suspect
>> it could be.  I made it so, and sshd still seemed to work.
>>
>> Eric
>
> I don't think there's a standard for how to break down the ZFS pool to
> individual datasets. If the install made only a single dataset for
> /var you would then effectively get a read-write /var/empty. The

*The same applies*

> applies if you install on UFS and don't assign a separate filesystem
> for /var/empty like the default install does in fact.
>
> -Kimmo
___
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"


Re: 10.0-BETA1 ZFS install -- /var/empty read-only

2013-10-23 Thread Kimmo Paasiala
On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 4:25 PM, Eric van Gyzen  wrote:
> I just installed 10.0-BETA1 using the [very cool] new automatic ZFS
> option.  I noticed that /var/empty is not mounted read-only.  I suspect
> it could be.  I made it so, and sshd still seemed to work.
>
> Eric

I don't think there's a standard for how to break down the ZFS pool to
individual datasets. If the install made only a single dataset for
/var you would then effectively get a read-write /var/empty. The
applies if you install on UFS and don't assign a separate filesystem
for /var/empty like the default install does in fact.

-Kimmo
___
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"


10.0-BETA1 ZFS install -- /var/empty read-only

2013-10-23 Thread Eric van Gyzen
I just installed 10.0-BETA1 using the [very cool] new automatic ZFS
option.  I noticed that /var/empty is not mounted read-only.  I suspect
it could be.  I made it so, and sshd still seemed to work.

Eric
___
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"