July 2009 - Darwin-dev - lists.apple.com

Re: Mac OS X Jails
by z3r0_f4ct0r＠mac.com 30 Jul '09

30 Jul '09

site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com Delivered-To: darwin-dev(a)lists.apple.com Using Jails I can easily create isolated servers to mimic a multiple server production environment and start/stop, shutdown, restart, alter, or remove them without hassle, and more importantly without interfering with the others as they are self contained. If I were to go with the multiple software installation scenario I will end up with a management headache, I would have to do a lot more configuration versus creating jails for each to get it to work. I don't want to trash my Mac OS X install, that is why I would prefer jailed environments as I am testing a lot of different open source packages and sometimes uninstalling is a pain along with tracking down bugs if some packages conflict with each other or libraries. FreeBSD, Linux, Solaris, AIX, and other flavors of UNIX like systems have OS level virtualization built in. Standard. This isn't an arcane feature. Its an important feature the Mac OS X currently does not have. I'll respect your opinion of thinking its naive, but don't brush it off (look at bitfrost for example). Major resources are being pushed into the virtualization space by major companies. Hopefully Mac OS X wont be playing catch up. For now I think its best that I setup a FreeBSD server with the appropriate jailed environments and connect to it to get work done. Regards, Juan On Thursday, July 30, 2009, at 04:28PM, "Eli Bach" <ebach2(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >On Jul 30, 2009, at 1:03 PM, z3r0_f4ct0r(a)mac.com wrote: > >> 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 > > >Juan, > >Pretty much everybody thinks (for their own X) "well, if the OS >doesn't have support for X, then it is lacking". > >Different OS's are targeted at different markets. > >The idea that Mac OS X doesn't directly support the level of >virtualization you happen to desire, for how you have decided to >approach the task you are trying to accomplish, and therefore is >lacking in important areas, is (IMHO) naive. > >Since this is a simulation, you could just use multiple virtual >network interfaces (which you can directly create in the Network >control panel), and you can install multiple copies of the software >packages you want in different directories and attach them to specific >IP addresses, and most support configuring how many processes and/or >threads they will use, so maybe if you more fully explain what you are >trying to simulate, people may be able to suggest how to do it on Mac >OS X. > >Eli > > _______________________________________________ >Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. >Darwin-dev mailing list (Darwin-dev(a)lists.apple.com) >Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: >http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/darwin-dev/z3r0_f4ct0r%40mac.com > >This email sent to z3r0_f4ct0r(a)mac.com > > _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Darwin-dev mailing list (Darwin-dev(a)lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/darwin-dev/site_archiver%40lists.app… This email sent to site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com

1 0

Re: Mac OS X Jails
by Eli Bach 30 Jul '09

30 Jul '09

site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com Delivered-To: darwin-dev(a)lists.apple.com Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:from:to :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:subject :mime-version:date:references:x-mailer; bh=8PxMPnPfJ7iebCNF/aYoI7MnrUQavwnpZmj92VKq4Xs=; b=sRYnpx57ekZHMHGF8DjVfF3LLhdBS6H5+Hir9LyOGHivPpi9UW2kqD4A1SZDz02SnE YWokFSFJZfZJ95/qdRvkaQmjHiTlOn6qfKtIVR3DJJlEmqSXAa3ammLMseBhiWf3yngB SqAYzI617Tqf/+e19LC/hzySrbb1Q8yIjxFTA= Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:from:to:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:subject:mime-version:date:references :x-mailer; b=s+Qcmfbe1WNmJrsVYW5vY4wJmTkkR2KO/9ESVVkkPo+/tEnSsfWGcAukJFvoe/PoFU mcHdoWgCIFEPaxa4fMZB/HFmWS4fcxdcbpwGl0r7ORwP419notXtis7XWDhtigBZu9oR NMMhz9Uc2LGJfhFFtAfmaKCKhwdrgiM2vvNCM= On Jul 30, 2009, at 1:03 PM, z3r0_f4ct0r(a)mac.com wrote: Regards, Juan Juan, Different OS's are targeted at different markets. Eli _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Darwin-dev mailing list (Darwin-dev(a)lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/darwin-dev/site_archiver%40lists.app… 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. Pretty much everybody thinks (for their own X) "well, if the OS doesn't have support for X, then it is lacking". The idea that Mac OS X doesn't directly support the level of virtualization you happen to desire, for how you have decided to approach the task you are trying to accomplish, and therefore is lacking in important areas, is (IMHO) naive. Since this is a simulation, you could just use multiple virtual network interfaces (which you can directly create in the Network control panel), and you can install multiple copies of the software packages you want in different directories and attach them to specific IP addresses, and most support configuring how many processes and/or threads they will use, so maybe if you more fully explain what you are trying to simulate, people may be able to suggest how to do it on Mac OS X. This email sent to site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com

1 0

Re: Mac OS X Jails
by Jean-Daniel Dupas 30 Jul '09

30 Jul '09

site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com Delivered-To: darwin-dev(a)lists.apple.com Le 30 juil. 09 à 22:03, z3r0_f4ct0r(a)mac.com a écrit : Regards, Juan On Jul 30, 2009, at 1:45 PM, Terry Lambert wrote: 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 _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Darwin-dev mailing list (Darwin-dev(a)lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/darwin-dev/devlists%40shadowlab.org This email sent to devlists(a)shadowlab.org _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Darwin-dev mailing list (Darwin-dev(a)lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/darwin-dev/site_archiver%40lists.app… You can affect any number of IP to a single interface, and nothing prevent you to run multiple instance of apache (just pass different config file as argument). 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. On Thursday, July 30, 2009, at 03:49PM, "Brian Mastenbrook" <brian(a)mastenbrook.net > 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. [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 brian(a)mastenbrook.net http://brian.mastenbrook.net/ This email sent to site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com

1 0

Re: Mac OS X Jails
by z3r0_f4ct0r＠mac.com 30 Jul '09

30 Jul '09

site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com Delivered-To: darwin-dev(a)lists.apple.com 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" <brian(a)mastenbrook.net> 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 >brian(a)mastenbrook.net >http://brian.mastenbrook.net/ > > _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Darwin-dev mailing list (Darwin-dev(a)lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/darwin-dev/site_archiver%40lists.app… This email sent to site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com

1 0

Re: Mac OS X Jails
by Brian Mastenbrook 30 Jul '09

30 Jul '09

site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com Delivered-To: darwin-dev(a)lists.apple.com On Jul 30, 2009, at 1:45 PM, Terry Lambert wrote: For reference: http://images.apple.com/legal/sla/docs/macosx105.pdf http://images.apple.com/legal/sla/docs/macosxserver105.pdf 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. [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 brian(a)mastenbrook.net http://brian.mastenbrook.net/ _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Darwin-dev mailing list (Darwin-dev(a)lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/darwin-dev/site_archiver%40lists.app… This email sent to site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com

1 0

Re: Mac OS X Jails
by Terry Lambert 30 Jul '09

30 Jul '09

site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com Delivered-To: darwin-dev(a)lists.apple.com The answer is no. -- Terry _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Darwin-dev mailing list (Darwin-dev(a)lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/darwin-dev/site_archiver%40lists.app… On Jul 30, 2009, at 8:33 AM, z3r0_f4ct0r(a)mac.com wrote: Is it possible to create Jails in Mac OS X like in FreeBSD or Solaris Zones? I haven't found any information on this. OS level virtualization requires a multiplication of already constrained resources and internal interposition of all calls across protection domain boundaries which deal with potentially conflicting resource namespaces: authentication tokens, security identifiers, network interfaces, IPC identifiers, file system namespaces, devices, etc.. This partitioning is a basic tenet of the jails/zones security models. 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. However, since your stated goal is simply multiple development environments, you probably don't even need that; even chroot is probably overkill, since all you need to control is really only your command and object paths, and you can pretty much do that with environment variables. This email sent to site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com

1 0

Re: Mac OS X Jails
by z3r0_f4ct0r＠mac.com 30 Jul '09

30 Jul '09

site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com Delivered-To: darwin-dev(a)lists.apple.com Well I'm trying to avoid VMWare or Parallels they are resource intensive. Jails are lightweight one kernel multiple virtual environments. You only need to duplicate the required directory structure versus the entire OS. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operating_system-level_virtualization I need to setup 8 different environments on my laptop, Jails would do the trick with low overhead. VMWare etc... would be sluggish. -Juan On Thursday, July 30, 2009, at 01:09PM, "Alexander von Below" <below(a)mac.com> wrote: >Run OS X Server in VM Ware. That's what I do. > >Alex > >Am 30.07.2009 um 18:27 schrieb z3r0_f4ct0r(a)mac.com: > >> I need to set up multiple development environments on my Macbook Pro >> and don't want >> to trash the default Mac OS X installs of apache etc... >> >> A Jail would simplify things considerably. >> I hope Mac OS X ports over FreeBSD Jails or Solaris Zones as soon as >> possible! Its sorely needed. >> >> Parallels or VMWare is over kill and resource intensive. Jails are >> lightweight. >> >> I really can't believe Jails aren't in Mac OS X. What a shock! >> >> How about Xen? Maybe thats feasible if Jails are missing. >> >> -Juan >> >> >> On Thursday, July 30, 2009, at 11:47AM, "Mo McRoberts" <lists(a)ilaven.net >> > wrote: >>> On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 16:33, <z3r0_f4ct0r(a)mac.com> wrote: >>>> Is it possible to create Jails in Mac OS X like in FreeBSD or >>>> Solaris Zones? >>>> >>>> I haven't found any information on this. >>> >>> Darwin doesn't include the jail() syscall, nor zones, but sandboxing >>> in 10.5+ may let you achieve the same thing (I haven't looked deeply >>> at it)—sandboxing seems to be mostly designed as a more advanced form >>> a chroot(), rather than a way to run a pseudo-virtualised environment >>> (possibly with its own IP or dedicated NIC assigned, along with other >>> selected physical resources). >>> >>> M. >>> >>> -- >>> http://nevali.net >>> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. >> Darwin-dev mailing list (Darwin-dev(a)lists.apple.com) >> Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: >> http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/darwin-dev/below%40mac.com >> >> This email sent to below(a)mac.com > > > _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Darwin-dev mailing list (Darwin-dev(a)lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/darwin-dev/site_archiver%40lists.app… This email sent to site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com

1 0

Re: Mac OS X Jails
by Alexander von Below 30 Jul '09

30 Jul '09

site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com Delivered-To: darwin-dev(a)lists.apple.com Run OS X Server in VM Ware. That's what I do. Alex Am 30.07.2009 um 18:27 schrieb z3r0_f4ct0r(a)mac.com: I really can't believe Jails aren't in Mac OS X. What a shock! How about Xen? Maybe thats feasible if Jails are missing. -Juan Darwin doesn't include the jail() syscall, nor zones, but sandboxing in 10.5+ may let you achieve the same thing (I haven't looked deeply at it)—sandboxing seems to be mostly designed as a more advanced form a chroot(), rather than a way to run a pseudo-virtualised environment (possibly with its own IP or dedicated NIC assigned, along with other selected physical resources). M. -- http://nevali.net _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Darwin-dev mailing list (Darwin-dev(a)lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/darwin-dev/below%40mac.com _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Darwin-dev mailing list (Darwin-dev(a)lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/darwin-dev/site_archiver%40lists.app… I need to set up multiple development environments on my Macbook Pro and don't want to trash the default Mac OS X installs of apache etc... A Jail would simplify things considerably. I hope Mac OS X ports over FreeBSD Jails or Solaris Zones as soon as possible! Its sorely needed. Parallels or VMWare is over kill and resource intensive. Jails are lightweight. On Thursday, July 30, 2009, at 11:47AM, "Mo McRoberts" <lists(a)ilaven.net > wrote: On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 16:33, <z3r0_f4ct0r(a)mac.com> wrote: Is it possible to create Jails in Mac OS X like in FreeBSD or Solaris Zones? I haven't found any information on this. This email sent to below(a)mac.com This email sent to site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com

1 0

Re: Mac OS X Jails
by z3r0_f4ct0r＠mac.com 30 Jul '09

30 Jul '09

site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com Delivered-To: darwin-dev(a)lists.apple.com I need to set up multiple development environments on my Macbook Pro and don't want to trash the default Mac OS X installs of apache etc... A Jail would simplify things considerably. I hope Mac OS X ports over FreeBSD Jails or Solaris Zones as soon as possible! Its sorely needed. Parallels or VMWare is over kill and resource intensive. Jails are lightweight. I really can't believe Jails aren't in Mac OS X. What a shock! How about Xen? Maybe thats feasible if Jails are missing. -Juan On Thursday, July 30, 2009, at 11:47AM, "Mo McRoberts" <lists(a)ilaven.net> wrote: >On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 16:33, <z3r0_f4ct0r(a)mac.com> wrote: >> Is it possible to create Jails in Mac OS X like in FreeBSD or Solaris Zones? >> >> I haven't found any information on this. > >Darwin doesn't include the jail() syscall, nor zones, but sandboxing >in 10.5+ may let you achieve the same thing (I haven't looked deeply >at it)—sandboxing seems to be mostly designed as a more advanced form >a chroot(), rather than a way to run a pseudo-virtualised environment >(possibly with its own IP or dedicated NIC assigned, along with other >selected physical resources). > >M. > >-- >http://nevali.net > > _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Darwin-dev mailing list (Darwin-dev(a)lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/darwin-dev/site_archiver%40lists.app… This email sent to site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com

1 0

Re: Mac OS X Jails
by Juan Madrigal 30 Jul '09

30 Jul '09

site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com Delivered-To: darwin-dev(a)lists.apple.com I really can't believe Jails aren't in Mac OS X. What a shock! How about Xen? Maybe thats feasible if Jails are missing. -Juan On Jul 30, 2009, at 11:47 AM, Mo McRoberts wrote: Darwin doesn't include the jail() syscall, nor zones, but sandboxing in 10.5+ may let you achieve the same thing (I haven't looked deeply at it)—sandboxing seems to be mostly designed as a more advanced form a chroot(), rather than a way to run a pseudo-virtualised environment (possibly with its own IP or dedicated NIC assigned, along with other selected physical resources). M. -- http://nevali.net _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Darwin-dev mailing list (Darwin-dev(a)lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/darwin-dev/site_archiver%40lists.app… I need to set up multiple development environments on my Macbook Pro and don't want to trash the default Mac OS X installs of apache etc... A Jail would simplify things considerably. I hope Mac OS X ports over FreeBSD Jails or Solaris Zones as soon as possible! Its sorely needed. Parallels or VMWare is over kill and resource intensive. Jails are lightweight. On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 16:33, <z3r0_f4ct0r(a)mac.com> wrote: Is it possible to create Jails in Mac OS X like in FreeBSD or Solaris Zones? I haven't found any information on this. This email sent to site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com

1 0