lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Feb]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: plan9 semantics on Linux - mount namespaces
From
Date
On 14.02.2018 16:17, Richard Weinberger wrote:

> From taking a *very* quick look into busybox source, I suspect this should fix
> it:
>
> diff --git a/util-linux/unshare.c b/util-linux/unshare.c
> index 875e3f86e304..3f59cf4d27c2 100644
> --- a/util-linux/unshare.c
> +++ b/util-linux/unshare.c
> @@ -350,9 +350,9 @@ int unshare_main(int argc UNUSED_PARAM, char **argv)
> * in that user namespace.
> */
> xopen_xwrite_close(PATH_PROC_SETGROUPS, "deny");
> - sprintf(uidmap_buf, "%u 0 1", (unsigned)reuid);
> + sprintf(uidmap_buf, "0 %u 1", (unsigned)reuid);
> xopen_xwrite_close(PATH_PROC_UIDMAP, uidmap_buf);
> - sprintf(uidmap_buf, "%u 0 1", (unsigned)regid);
> + sprintf(uidmap_buf, "0 %u 1", (unsigned)regid);
> xopen_xwrite_close(PATH_PROC_GIDMAP, uidmap_buf);
> } else
> if (setgrp_str) {
>

hmm, now it works, but only when strace'ing it.
that's really strange.

But still I wonder whether user_ns really solves my problem, as I don't
want to create sandboxed users, but only private namespaces just like
on Plan9.


--mtx

--
Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
Free software and Linux embedded engineering
info@metux.net -- +49-151-27565287

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-02-14 18:21    [W:0.079 / U:0.148 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site