On 2015-07-15 19:19:23, Roger Leigh wrote: > On 15/07/2015 17:47, Tyler Hicks wrote: > >Hello - I'm sending a friendly poke in hopes that I can get a review for > >my proposed patch. The unpatched behavior is a considerable usability > >issue on systems that use systemd, schroot, and a filesystem mounted at > >/home/$USER. I'd prefer upstream review before I apply the patch to > >schroot in Ubuntu. Thanks! > > It looks reasonable for you to apply in Ubuntu, but I'm not yet sure if it's > safe to apply upstream. It might well be safe for Debian as well, but I > can't make that determination myself.
Thank you for the review! > Is this safe to use on systems not using systemd? It should be safe on those systems. The mounts that are being bound into the chroot will most likely already be using private mount propagation since that is the default mount propagation mode. > Does it require a specific version of util-linux for the --make-[r]private > options to mount? If so, it probably needs a proper functional check for > them, and using those as conditionals rather than just __linux__. Good question. Support for --make-[r]private has been around since the following commit: https://git.kernel.org/cgit/utils/util-linux/util-linux.git/commit/?id=389fbea536e4308d9475fa2a89e53e188ce8a0e3 It was first released in util-linux 2.13, which happened on 28-Aug-2007: https://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/utils/util-linux/v2.13/v2.13-ReleaseNotes I don't think we need a functional check for something that has been around for so long. Tyler
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
