Re: semaphore usage "port based"?

On Mon, 3 Apr 2006, Tom Lane wrote:

> BTW, as long as we're annoying the freebsd-stable list with discussions of 
> workarounds, I'm wondering whether our shared memory code might have similar 
> risks.  Does FBSD 6 also lie about the existence of other-jail processes 
> connected to a shared memory segment --- ie, in shmctl(IPC_STAT)'s result, 
> does shm_nattch count only processes in our own jail?

People are, of course, welcome to read the Jail documentation in order to read 
the warning about not enabling the System V IPC support in Jails, and what the 
possible results of doing so are.

Robert N M Watson