[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote On 08/02/06 05:59,:
And new semantics to allow that would have one twist: you really only
want to allow this zone-requested loopback when the filesystem to mount
is share(1M)'d to the zone. You can't allow zones to have arbitrary
loopback mounts created upon request. S
>And new semantics to allow that would have one twist: you really only
>want to allow this zone-requested loopback when the filesystem to mount
>is share(1M)'d to the zone. You can't allow zones to have arbitrary
>loopback mounts created upon request. So this might need support for
>share -F
Glenn Faden wrote:
Jerry Jelinek wrote:
I believe the problem is that the zone looks like a separate system
so the automounter within the zone does not know to use lofs to
mount the filesystem from the global zone; it uses nfs instead.
Yes, but even if it knew it should use lofs, there is no
Rainer Orth wrote:
Glenn Faden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Since the non-global zone automounter is unaware and unable to do
anything else, it will simply do an NFS mount. The problem is that CR
5065254 (NFS/UFS deadlock when system is both NFS server and client) is
likely to cause a dead
Glenn Faden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Since the non-global zone automounter is unaware and unable to do
> anything else, it will simply do an NFS mount. The problem is that CR
> 5065254 (NFS/UFS deadlock when system is both NFS server and client) is
> likely to cause a deadlock.
Does anyo
Glenn Faden writes:
> >It can easily tell this though.
> >
> >
> It's not obvious to me how the non-global zone can determine the
> hostname of its global zone unless the global zone puts that information
> somewhere (like in a new file).
It should not be based on something flimsy (and user-ad
>It's not obvious to me how the non-global zone can determine the
>hostname of its global zone unless the global zone puts that information
>somewhere (like in a new file).
Connect to rpcbind and then check whether getpeerucred() works :-)
>>That's just a small matter of programming :-)
>
>See
Jerry Jelinek wrote:
I believe the problem is that the zone looks like a separate system
so the automounter within the zone does not know to use lofs to
mount the filesystem from the global zone; it uses nfs instead.
Yes, but even if it knew it should use lofs, there is no way it can
express
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There is no way for the non-global zone automounter to convert these
automounts from NFS to LOFS. Firstly, there is no API for the non-global
zone to determine that the NFS server is, in fact, the global zone
sharing the same kernel.
It can easily tell this thou
On 7/31/06, Glenn Faden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Paul Kraus wrote:
> If the home directories are auto-mounted, then work just like
> on a non-zoned system. NFS from remote servers is mounted via NFS, if
> the global zone is the home directory server, then the NFS mount is
> supposed
Paul Kraus wrote:
On 7/31/06, Steffen Weiberle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Home directories are more problematic; you will need to loopback mount
> them into the local zones.
Is the underlying problem being worked on, or is it worth an RFE to
make this transparent (automount
if remote, auto
>There is no way for the non-global zone automounter to convert these
>automounts from NFS to LOFS. Firstly, there is no API for the non-global
>zone to determine that the NFS server is, in fact, the global zone
>sharing the same kernel.
It can easily tell this though.
>
Paul Kraus wrote:
On 7/31/06, Steffen Weiberle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Home directories are more problematic; you will need to loopback mount
> them into the local zones.
Is the underlying problem being worked on, or is it worth an RFE to
make this transparent (automount
if remote, aut
On 7/31/06, Steffen Weiberle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Home directories are more problematic; you will need to loopback mount
> them into the local zones.
Is the underlying problem being worked on, or is it worth an RFE to make this
transparent (automount
if remote, auto-lofs if local (not
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote On 07/31/06 07:36,:
Hi all,
I have a customer with the following question
I'm curious on what the best way to propagate all the user accounts on
the global zone down to the zones that are already created.
The only way that I know is to just copy the files needed li
>Hi all,
>
>I have a customer with the following question
>
>I'm curious on what the best way to propagate all the user accounts on
>the global zone down to the zones that are already created.
>The only way that I know is to just copy the files needed like
>/etc/passwd and /etc/shadow, etc
Hi all,
I have a customer with the following question
I'm curious on what the best way to propagate all the user accounts on
the global zone down to the zones that are already created.
The only way that I know is to just copy the files needed like
/etc/passwd and /etc/shadow, etc. Is
17 matches
Mail list logo
