Solved NULLFS missing from the GENERIC file

M

max21

Would anyone know why the FreeBSD Development team removed NULLFS from GENERIC kernel? I did not pay attention of it being missing until now.

I had to compile this in the GENERIC kernel back in the 9x something days.
Code: 
option GEOM_ELI
option NULLFS
Maybe I did not need it at all because I did not touch the 10.0 or the 10.1 kernel and I was still able to encrypt the swap slice.
Code: 
/dev/ada0s1b.eli	/	swap	sw	0	0
I'm not really sure that it had anything to do with this, or not. I'm just wondering if it will be a mistake to put NULLFS back in the file? I want to compile my new kernel tonight with less unused devices as possible.
 
That's an excellent question nakal. Here's a link I am reading up on now. I'm hoping to learn that it can be a very controllable pass-through because I have read here at some threads that it poses a security risk. This links talks about other pass-through also. I want to use it for jails that only have a single process in each. They will not be users jails.

http://www.systhread.net/texts/200702nullfs1.php
 
  • Thanks
Reactions: Oko
As far as I've been able to find it never was part of GENERIC. At least not on 8.x, 9.x and 10.x.
 
Hi SirDice, I use to use custom Generics found on the INTERNET back than so that's where it came from.

After this crash-course I understand the pitfalls of NULLFS.

http://www.cvedetails.com/vulnerabi...-7/version_id-152069/Freebsd-Freebsd-9.2.html

It don't seem to be a way around it. I think I use kldload nullfs or nullfs_load="YES" for now since I'm not into developing file-systems. But I wonder if it would be safe enough when using only for (bug-less) processes in jails (if that ever become possible).
 
I was rudely interrupted last night and did not get to this last line. Today, just now, I read this:
nakal said:
Stick with GENERIC whenever possible!
Click to expand...
So that was the answer I was hoping for. I thought it was included than removed from GENERIC by Development and that made me concern (my bad). Either way, now I know it is safe to compile it into kernel. Thanks a lot nakal.

Sorry about all the confusion guys.

Yours truly

Bruce :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top