On Mon, Jul 03, 2023 at 11:21:22PM +0200, Silvio Knizek wrote:
> why is it suggested to run `named` within its own chroot? For security
> reasons? This can be achieved much easier with systemd native options.
That feature is two decades older than systemd, and name server
operators are darn conse
Hi Marc,
why is it suggested to run `named` within its own chroot? For security reasons?
This can be achieved much easier with systemd native options.
Something like
`/etc/systemd/system/named.service`
```ini
[Unit]
Description=Internet domain name server
After=network.target
[Service]
Type=n
Hi,
this is a user-level question from someone who wants to make use of
systemd but has not quite grown the gut feeling about which way is the
right way to go.
I am running bind 9 on more than a handful of systems providing name
services as recursive and/or authoritative name servers. As it has b
On 03.07.2023 14:17, Lennart Poettering wrote:
On Mo, 03.07.23 10:58, Valentijn Sessink ([email protected]) wrote:
Now my remaining question is probably so very basic, that you sort of missed
it: my "session" is started from a script and so I'm probably able to stop
all services in the sessi
On Mo, 03.07.23 10:58, Valentijn Sessink ([email protected]) wrote:
> Now my remaining question is probably so very basic, that you sort of missed
> it: my "session" is started from a script and so I'm probably able to stop
> all services in the session from within this script - if I knew how t
Hi Lennart, hi list,
On 03-07-2023 10:47, Lennart Poettering wrote:
I can get the CGroup and session scope with "systemctl status ";
but I still can't figure out what to stop then. So how can I finish this
"spawned off" session - the one that started from a "PAMName=login" option
in the service
On Fr, 30.06.23 15:11, Valentijn Sessink ([email protected]) wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 28-06-2023 18:04, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> > > "PAMName=login", then starts a script and a few (old X11 related)
> > > programs.
> [...]>> Is there a way to amend the service file to stop these children?
> > No
