Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH] nextfd(2) | From | Colin Walters <> | Date | Fri, 06 Apr 2012 11:27:09 -0400 |
| |
On Fri, 2012-04-06 at 12:54 +0300, Alexey Dobriyan wrote:
> But I find it little hypocritical that kernel developers add CONFIG_PROC_FS, > fix compilation problems associated with it, do not mount proc by default, > do not mark it unmountable somehow and > then say procless setups aren't worth it. > > I haven't seen personally procless environments > but several people mentioned them including on this very list.
Now that the kernel has CLONE_NEWNS, it's possible to mount proc "privately" just for a specific process tree. It meshes nicely with CLONE_NEWPID. Previously if you mounted proc in a chroot, it cluttered the mount list and leaked information about outside the root. With modern clone/unshare, that's no longer a concern, so there's much less reason to use "bare" chroots.
| |