unionfs status

[Kurt Jaeger]

Vadim Goncharov wrote:
> Robert Watson wrote:

> > If you're using unionfs 
> > to take a template system and "broadcast it" to many jails, you probably don't 
> > want all the jails talking to the same syslogd, you want them each talking to 
> > their own.  When syslogd in a jail finds a disconnected socket, which is 
> > effectively what a NULL v_socket pointer means, in /var/run/log, it should be 
> > unlinking it and creating a new socket, not reusing the existing file on disk.

> This code's use in jails is primarily intended for mysql (and the like
> daemons), not syslogd (for which you said it right). Such daemons really
> require broadcasting, yep - so unionfs should support it...

Thanks for this description. So we basically have two different
uses for UNIX sockets in unionfs with jails ?

1) socket in jail to communicate only inside one jail (syslog-case)
2) socket in jail as a means of IPC between different jails (mysql-case)

Is 2) really supposed to work like this ?

-- 
pi at opsec.eu            +49 171 3101372                        12 years to go !
_______________________________________________
freebsd-current at freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"