On 03/15/2013 07:58 PM, Serge Hallyn wrote: > Quoting Glauber Costa (glommer@xxxxxxxxxxxxx): >> On 03/15/2013 07:21 PM, Serge Hallyn wrote: >>> Quoting Glauber Costa (glommer@xxxxxxxxxxxxx): >>>> On 03/15/2013 06:00 PM, Serge Hallyn wrote: >>>>> Quoting Eric W. Biederman (ebiederm@xxxxxxxxxxxx): >>>>>> Glauber Costa <glommer@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> devpts mounts in user namespaces is queued for 3.9. However, while playing >>>>>>> with it I found it to be less than ideal. Although it could possibly work >>>>>>> with custom software that can be made to point to /dev/pts/ptmx, a few things >>>>>>> prevent it from working correctly for people that, like us, are booting full >>>>>>> distributions. >>>>>> >>>>>> Full distributions that have not been modified to be minimally container >>>>>> aware. >>>>> >>>>> Right, in fact in this case it doesn't need to be minimally container >>>>> aware, you just create the bind mount yourself and init just needs to >>>>> accept that it shouldn't touch it. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Well, what if it doesn't? >>>> >>>> At least in the system I am using, centos6, udev mounts a tmpfs in a >>>> temporary location, and then mount --move this to /dev. This is now >>>> empty, and devpts will be mounted ontop of that. >>> >>> This also messes up your /dev/ttyN setup right? How are you handling >>> that? >>> >> very simple: udev will just mknod everything back, so let him! > > So you're not using bind-mounted ptys over /dev/ttyN? > Not in particular, and I haven't felt the need yet. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
