On Sun, Oct 02, 2005 at 09:54:54PM -0700, Robin Lee Powell wrote:
> I'm trying to get a program called mooix running in VServer and it
> seems to need CAP_SYS_ADMIN or CAP_SYS_RESOURCE, and I don't
> understand why.
>
> The error if both are turned off is:
>
> Starting Mooix: moodmood: uids.c:125
The app I want to run in a VServer, mooix, creates (among other
special things) TTY device files. If I run it without CAP_MKNOD, I
get:
cp: cannot create special file
`/var/lib/mooix/system/sessionmanager/sessions/item1/tty': Operation not
permitted
Unable to copy /dev/pts/10 to
/var/lib/mooix
I'm trying to get a program called mooix running in VServer and it
seems to need CAP_SYS_ADMIN or CAP_SYS_RESOURCE, and I don't
understand why.
The error if both are turned off is:
Starting Mooix: moodmood: uids.c:125: reclaim: Assertion `pid != -1'
failed.
Digging into the code, that line is ju
It seems that documentation on configuring a VServer is scattered
far and wide. Most of the docs I've found refer to
/etc/vservers/[server].conf, which apparently doesn't work anymore,
at least according to
http://www.nongnu.org/util-vserver/doc/conf/configuration.html
That page has a lot of info
i just correlated our ftp server on our web machine taking a very long time to
respond and firing off our monitor warnings with a particular guest i am
working on on another machine. when it crashes on stopping, the web server
ftp goes critical. after i bring the guest back up and it works prope
On Sunday 02 October 2005 05:06 pm, Benedikt Boehm wrote:
i used your new methods to make the template and then make a stage3 of my own
and make a guest from that.. incredibly nice
> On Sunday 02 October 2005 20:42, Chuck wrote:
> > On Sunday 02 October 2005 04:41 pm, Benedikt Boehm wrote:
On Sunday 02 October 2005 20:42, Chuck wrote:
> On Sunday 02 October 2005 04:41 pm, Benedikt Boehm wrote:
>
> ok cool thanks... one more quick one...
>
>
> if i choose the latest 2005.1 standard p3 stage3 from the mirrors then
> overlayed the guest baselayout is that sufficient or are there other
>
On Sunday 02 October 2005 04:41 pm, Benedikt Boehm wrote:
ok cool thanks... one more quick one...
if i choose the latest 2005.1 standard p3 stage3 from the mirrors then
overlayed the guest baselayout is that sufficient or are there other changes
in the stage3 that i should stick with the older
On Sunday 02 October 2005 20:21, Chuck wrote:
> On Sunday 02 October 2005 11:49 am, Chuck wrote:
>
> with these new versions of base layout and util-vserver, do we still need
> to put this into a post start script?
>
>
> vattribute --xid 3407 --flag ^37
>
> or is that now not needed?
it is not nee
On Sunday 02 October 2005 11:49 am, Chuck wrote:
with these new versions of base layout and util-vserver, do we still need to
put this into a post start script?
vattribute --xid 3407 --flag ^37
or is that now not needed?
> On Sunday 02 October 2005 10:46 am, Christian Heim wrote:
> > On Su
On Sunday 02 October 2005 10:46 am, Christian Heim wrote:
> On Sunday 02 October 2005 15:48, Chuck wrote:
> > wrong terminology im sure :) the ability to set mark files and their
> > contents.
> You mean the context tagging of files by any chance ?!
>
no.. i dont know how long mark files have bee
On Sunday 02 October 2005 15:48, Chuck wrote:
> wrong terminology im sure :) the ability to set mark files and their
> contents.
You mean the context tagging of files by any chance ?!
> where can i find the differences between the 2 base layouts? i am getting
Well, the 1.12.0_pre stuff is AFAIK a
On Sunday 02 October 2005 09:38 am, Christian Heim wrote:
> On Sunday 02 October 2005 15:15, Chuck wrote:
> >
> >
> > i need reliability more than 'bleeding edge' however i do need things like
> > exec inside a guest from host and abilities to flag various hosts to
> > autostart and things like th
On Sunday 02 October 2005 15:15, Chuck wrote:
>
>
> i need reliability more than 'bleeding edge' however i do need things like
> exec inside a guest from host and abilities to flag various hosts to
> autostart and things like that. we have no 64 bit guests or hosts so ...
"exec" as in vserver ${n
On Sunday 02 October 2005 15:19, Chuck wrote:
> the only reason i use vanilla kernels now is i have found on my
> workstations and servers a noticable increase in performance using vanilla
> over the gentoo-sources. i believe it is due to all the extra patches that
> i dont use anyway :)
>
> is the
On Sunday 02 October 2005 08:31 am, Christian Heim wrote:
>
>
> > 2. if so what are the latest versions of the above?
> * latest kernel patch is at 2.1.0_rc2 (IIRC)
>- for Gentoo that is =vserver-sources-2.1.0_rc2 (~x86)
> incorporating kernel-2.6.13.2 and vs2.1.0_rc2
>
the only rea
On Sunday 02 October 2005 08:31 am, Christian Heim wrote:
> On Sunday 02 October 2005 13:59, Chuck wrote:
> > I guess my question is more than one :) .
> >
> > 1. is the stop bug fixed
> Yes, in the latest baselayout-vserver they're fixed.
> That means you've currently to do the following inside yo
On Sunday 02 October 2005 13:59, Chuck wrote:
> I guess my question is more than one :) .
>
> 1. is the stop bug fixed
Yes, in the latest baselayout-vserver they're fixed.
That means you've currently to do the following inside your guests:
# echo '=sys-apps/baselayout-vserver-1.11.13-r1 ~x86 \
>> /
i am currently using the "Bertl-Shep" stop fix which appears to be working for
the most part. Is there a permanent cure for this now?
I am currently using the following versions
latest as of 2 weeks ago gentoo 2005.1 install on host.
kernel 2.6.13.1 vanilla sources from kernel.org
with patch-2
19 matches
Mail list logo
