Hi John, On Mon, Aug 06, 2018 at 10:09:53PM +0100, John Lenton wrote: > On Mon, 6 Aug 2018 at 21:16, Steve Langasek <[email protected]> wrote:
> > I think it's exceedingly unlikely that anyone is going to unpack, and > > subsequently boot, an Ubuntu root tarball on a filesystem that doesn't > > support xattrs. All the filesystems that Ubuntu supports out of the box as > > rootfs (in terms of installers, and filesystem tools preinstalled) support > > xattrs. > while this is strictly true, 'snap pack' and 'snapcraft pack' > currently disable xattrs, and the store will not approve snaps that > are built with xattrs. Thanks, that's a useful data point. Do you think it is a practical concern for snaps if an Ubuntu rootfs uses fscaps? Is this an argument against allowing fscaps in Ubuntu, or should it just be a matter for snapcraft to warn/error about on creation, guiding users to using setuid instead? As a worked example: the core snap does ship /bin/ping, which is currently setuid-root in Ubuntu but would move to fscaps in this proposal. (The core snap does not include mtr-tiny.) What do you believe is the correct outcome here for /bin/ping in a future ubuntu core 20 snap? -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developer https://www.debian.org/ [email protected] [email protected]
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
-- ubuntu-devel mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
