Re: Mac OS X Jails
Re: Mac OS X Jails
- Subject: Re: Mac OS X Jails
- From: email@hidden
- Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2009 16:03:38 -0400
Well the idea is set up multiple servers on my laptop communicate with each other so I can simulate a network of servers. This calls for multiple custom apache installs (virtual hosts wont do the trick), haproxy, varnish, lighttpd, and some other software packages with different internal IP's.
With Jails resources can be assigned IP's, CPU's etc... I'm not certain chroot can handle this.
I'm think I'm going to have to be forced do this with FreeBSD on another box as I don't have the luxury
of Jails on Mac OS X. That or OpenSolaris.
Hopefully Jails will be built into OS X natively to handle these situations
It is supposed to be the "most advanced operating system" right? Seems lacking in important areas.
Regards,
Juan
On Thursday, July 30, 2009, at 03:49PM, "Brian Mastenbrook" <email@hidden> wrote:
>On Jul 30, 2009, at 1:45 PM, Terry Lambert wrote:
>
>> Given your description of your problem space, you don't need
>> partitioning of additional resource namespaces for security reasons,
>> so you could simply use chroot instead and handle it as a filesystem/
>> security identifier namespace issue.
>
>IANAL, but if you do decide to go down this route keep in mind that
>from a license perspective chroot is the same as virtualization, which
>is not allowed for non-server versions of OS X [1]. If you violate
>this condition of the license, your license to use that copy of OS X
>is automatically terminated, and you must destroy your copies of the
>software.
>
>Nothing permits you to have more than one copy at a time of any
>portion of the Apple Software [2], and not even buying additional
>licenses will allow you to run multiple copies of the operating system
>at the same time. For Server, you'll need to have one license per
>chroot. For your 8-environment configuration, this works out to the
>cost of the base license ($499) plus $499 per chroot, totaling $4491.
>You'd probably be better off with a stack of Mac Minis at that point.
>
>You may be able to build enough of a chroot environment out of
>darwinbuild for your application, which would get around these issues.
>Or you could make directories of hardlinks for your chroot, but any
>file modifications would be shared across chroots.
>
>You might be able to do something with union mounts as well, but I
>think you'd still need at least one independent copy of the operating
>system, which would still require Server.
>
>Historically developers have simply installed multiple copies of OS X
>in separate partitions on the same machine, but this probably also
>violates the agreement for non-Server. The same clause that prohibits
>running multiple copies of the operating at the same time also
>prohibits having multiple copies of the operating system installed at
>the same time.
>
>As I said, I'm not a lawyer; I'm simply going on Apple's own
>interpretation of the license agreement as forbidding VMware to
>virtualize client versions of OS X.
>
>For reference:
>
>http://images.apple.com/legal/sla/docs/macosx105.pdf
>http://images.apple.com/legal/sla/docs/macosxserver105.pdf
>
>[1] "This License allows you to install, use and run one (1) copy of
>the Apple Software on a single Apple-labeled computer at a time."
>[2] Except for a single copy made for backup purposes. I'm sure many
>Time Machine users have already violated this stipulation accidentally
>as well.
>--
>Brian Mastenbrook
>email@hidden
>http://brian.mastenbrook.net/
>
>
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Darwin-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden