10.0-BETA1 ZFS install -- /var/empty read-only
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
Re: 10.0-BETA1 ZFS install -- /var/empty read-only
On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 4:25 PM, Eric van Gyzen e...@vangyzen.net 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
Re: 10.0-BETA1 ZFS install -- /var/empty read-only
On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 4:29 PM, Kimmo Paasiala kpaas...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 4:25 PM, Eric van Gyzen e...@vangyzen.net 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
On 10/23/2013 08:30, Kimmo Paasiala wrote: On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 4:29 PM, Kimmo Paasiala kpaas...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 4:25 PM, Eric van Gyzen e...@vangyzen.net 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
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 kpaas...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 4:25 PM, Eric van Gyzen e...@vangyzen.net 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
