On Sat, Mar 24, 2012 at 16:07, Thierry Vignaud <thierry.vign...@gmail.com>wrote:
> On 18 March 2012 10:51, Pascal Terjan <pter...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Well unionfs seemed to get different oops in each new version. Anyway > > I don't think it should be done like this (having specific code for > > unionfs everywhere). > > I want to improve current chroot mode (like using a cgroup to easily > > kill all processes or set limits) and have a common api to allow other > > modes, like building in kvm for example, or using lvm/btrfs rw > > snapshots (which should be better supported than unionfs). > > Then, we could maybe clean this in Chroot.pm: > > sub add_local_user { > my ($chroot_tmp, $run, $config, $luser, $uid) = @_; > > # change the builder user to the local user id > # FIXME it seems that unionfs does not handle well the change of the > # uid of files > # if (system(qq|sudo chroot $chroot_tmp usermod -u $run->{uid} > builder|)) { > > Though sadly we lost the actual commit that did that due to the 2007 crash > Yes I noticed but this is a behavior change so I wanted to check more closely before doing it, if nothing relies on it