Re: [PATCH] nextfd(2)

[Colin Walters]

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.


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