From nobody Wed Oct 15 18:48:46 2025 X-Original-To: current@mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4cn0VM6LbRz6Cpfw; Wed, 15 Oct 2025 18:48:59 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from junchoon@dec.sakura.ne.jp) Received: from www121.sakura.ne.jp (www121.sakura.ne.jp [153.125.133.21]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4cn0VM29MCz4BCH; Wed, 15 Oct 2025 18:48:58 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from junchoon@dec.sakura.ne.jp) Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; none Received: from kalamity.joker.local (124-18-6-240.area1c.commufa.jp [124.18.6.240]) (authenticated bits=0) by www121.sakura.ne.jp (8.18.1/8.17.1/[SAKURA-WEB]/20201212) with ESMTPA id 59FImk7L059058; Thu, 16 Oct 2025 03:48:48 +0900 (JST) (envelope-from junchoon@dec.sakura.ne.jp) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=dec.sakura.ne.jp; s=s2405; t=1760554129; bh=bqODoDv+I+qhyglXA4nd0hbWiY7AwntvD515N8So8MU=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References; b=MEYnCLZ768PvkQZmp3tPH6ShJe95Z3Pd+1S5IYJKubBtd4khE58GeUUYftUiouvmk Ez/LIrnklHzhZLi8bka5lTNvBlfefw3ZkCMNHzkptyEEY6QjidpleShifl48x9Ih1r lOqT3KI2rRfTQWGAmKNHdfs/7ECuMU2qg5UeVAcA= Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2025 03:48:46 +0900 From: Tomoaki AOKI To: Matteo Riondato Cc: Lexi Winter , Roger Marquis , Ronald Klop , current@freebsd.org, pkgbase@freebsd.org Subject: Re: should FreeBSD-dhclient depend on FreeBSD-resolvconf? Message-Id: <20251016034846.3d02dbeea6af57e75f68a8ef@dec.sakura.ne.jp> In-Reply-To: <822F9D2B-A82F-4765-8765-6604F9F79CBC@FreeBSD.org> References: <324231230.147694.1760527890049@localhost> <43B68BB6-02FA-470E-A8C5-99D15E3707D7@FreeBSD.org> <89861E7A-64C7-47CB-89F6-A93AB14813FF@FreeBSD.org> <3E63F63B-0C90-43E2-BF55-30310B7599D3@FreeBSD.org> <7r257p26-qqs6-r1q3-9456-qn3o02rson6r@mx.roble.com> <822F9D2B-A82F-4765-8765-6604F9F79CBC@FreeBSD.org> Organization: Junchoon corps X-Mailer: Sylpheed 3.7.0 (GTK+ 2.24.33; amd64-portbld-freebsd15.0) List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-current List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spamd-Bar: ---- X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-4.00 / 15.00]; REPLY(-4.00)[]; ASN(0.00)[asn:7684, ipnet:153.125.128.0/18, country:JP] X-Rspamd-Pre-Result: action=no action; module=replies; Message is reply to one we originated X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4cn0VM29MCz4BCH On Wed, 15 Oct 2025 12:05:24 -0400 Matteo Riondato wrote: > > On Oct 15, 2025, at 11:16 AM, Lexi Winter wrote: > > > > Roger Marquis wrote in <7r257p26-qqs6-r1q3-9456-qn3o02rson6r@mx.roble.com>: > >> I think most of us would define a minimal jail > > > > again -- i appreciate this is not very clear from the package name -- > > the "minimal-jail" set is not "a minimal jail". it is the "minimal" > > set, i.e. the set of packages required for a basic multi-user UNIX > > system, but without packages which don't work in a jail. > > Would calling it “basic-jail” or “standard-jail” (terms used in previous emails on this thread) perhaps be more descriptive? > > Thanks, > Matteo I prefer"minimal" here, as term "standard" should be different case-by-case. For admins who want to run each services exposing to Internet to be run on jails "per service", "minimal" is equal to "standard". But, especially corporate admins who needs "per-emproyee" jails for security, almost full sets of base plus common-apps-of-the-corporate ports should be called "standard (of the corporate)". -- Tomoaki AOKI