lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2000]   [Feb]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Linux's future: //posix/ipc, //root and so on ?


On Tue, 29 Feb 2000, Alexander Viro wrote:

>
>
> On Wed, 1 Mar 2000, Khimenko Victor wrote:
>
> > It's thing like ftpd which expect that environment is there. Or similar
> > program to execure cgi script in sandbox. And without devfs, procfs and
> > ipcfs it's DOABLE: you can put all needed libraries as hardlinks
> > there. Without // trick (or rather /../ trick -- looks much saner to me)
> > it's doable as well. WITHOUT changes for each and every program when new
> > netfs or whjatever is implemented.
>
> Oh, _please_! Before dropping root, but after geting a private namespace
> and doing chroot():
> while read i; do mount $i; done </etc/fstab.virtual
>
Hmm. Ok. Even if it'll require changes in lots of programs and not
exactly clean solution it'll work if we'll get private namespace... Now
the question is "when?"... Is it 2.5 issue ?

> > Namespaces ARE great. It's just orthogonal issue :-( The whole idea behind
> > superoot is to remove need to add ANYTHING to programs with chroot when
> > there are new wonderfull filesystem like procfs, devfs or ipcfs is
> > created.
>
> See above.
>
Thnx. Private namespaces can do things not doable with superroot and if
there are exist hope to get working private namespaces in 2.5 supperroot
idea is not needed...


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:56    [W:1.531 / U:0.548 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site