On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 12:52:30PM +0000, Julian Yon wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Nov 2012 08:34:29 +0000
> David Laight <da...@l8s.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 10:14:18PM +0100, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
> > >
> > > Frankly, I still don't see the point why something would want to
> > > use it.
> >
> > How about running a staticly linked executable inside a chroot without
> > needed the executable itself to do the chroot.
>
> What does this gain over passing a filename around? (NB. I'm not
> claiming that's an entirely safe model either, but it's already
> possible).
You don't need the executable image inside the chroot.
David
--
David Laight: da...@l8s.co.uk
