On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 05:40:43PM -0400, Ed Hill wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Apr 2007 21:46:04 +0200 Axel Thimm wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 03:24:12PM +0200, Phil Knirsch wrote:
> >
> > > The solution debian and Gentoo iirc use which are basically
> > > buildroots is the only way i know how you can cleanly separate
> > > various archs on one system. Sadly you'll then loose the common and
> > > sharable files, but any other solution will need very carefull and
> > > detailed planing.
> >
> > Personally I prefer banning multilib in rpm for good and if that would
> > be best done by using chroot solutions, I'm all for it. The multilib
> > implementation within rpm magic just isn't scaling and produces more
> > bugs on the way than we can fix.
>
>
> I'm not familiar with the chroots used in Debian or Gentoo. Can someone
> please say a few words about their usability? I'm just wondering about
> the following:
>
> - do chroots require special permissions or group memberships?
chroots require root priviledges to chroot into. These can be
implemented by suid programs that become root, chroot and then drop
priviledges again.
> - once you are in a chroot isn't it nearly impossible to
> access files outside it? Put differently, are there some
> interesting soft-linking or re-mounting gymnastics or other
> hacks going on here to get at, say, your ${HOME} or other
> random directories from a chroot-ed program?
The only way to access your $HOME is by mounting it into the
chroot. Soft links can't help you.
> It just seems to me that chroots are probably a lot less usable than
> binaries placed in {,/usr}/{,s}bin64 or similar.
--
Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
Attachment:
pgp5r3wunAGIA.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- Fedora-maintainers mailing list Fedora-maintainers@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers
-- Fedora-maintainers-readonly mailing list Fedora-maintainers-readonly@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers-readonly
