On Sun, Jun 19, 2011 at 10:16:05PM -0400, Fbsd8 wrote:
Give the qjail port a try. It has the ability to reference jails by name
and create jails without starting them. Though it does not use the
new-style jail command.
root@fbsd:/usr/ports/sysutils/qjail
zsh/2 1002 # make install
On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 11:41:21AM -0400, Fbsd8 wrote:
Daniel Bye wrote:
On Sun, Jun 19, 2011 at 10:16:05PM -0400, Fbsd8 wrote:
Give the qjail port a try. It has the ability to reference jails by name
and create jails without starting them. Though it does not use the
new-style jail command
To the originator of this thread - do give qjail a try - it's very good.
I'll definitely give it a look! Thanks for the suggestion/
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To
Lars Kellogg-Stedman wrote:
Hello all,
I'm curious if there's been any work done to make /etc/rc.d/jail use
the new-style jail command (jail -c path=... name=..., etc)...or if
there's been any work done to create a replacement? There are three
features I would love to see in the stock version
a pretty good argument there for doing so. In general,
though, do you see jails as particularly important or useful when not in
a hosting environment where you're giving root access to an untrusted
party? How far do you go toward segregating services? Theoretically, you
could have a jail per
you see jails as particularly important or useful when not in
a hosting environment where you're giving root access to an untrusted
party? How far do you go toward segregating services? Theoretically, you
could have a jail per daemon, but it seems like down that path lies madness.
--
Kirk Strauser
you see jails as particularly important or useful when not in
a hosting environment where you're giving root access to an untrusted
party? How far do you go toward segregating services? Theoretically, you
could have a jail per daemon, but it seems like down that path lies
madness.
--
Kirk
