On 05/03/2016 00:56, Louis Gesbert wrote: > Removing `--insecure`: absolutely, I would be glad to if I get agreement from > the repository team.
I see that you merged https://github.com/ocaml/opam/pull/2460 (which removes --insecure/--no-check-certificates ; in which I also reported statistics about https hosts in opam-repository). > Sandboxing: we've actually been studying this recently with Grégoire, and it > seems it's not that difficult to do on Linux, using the namespaces. The > related > features are actually available with just some calls to `unshare` and > `mount`, > and we wrote a quick script that makes ~ read-only, while keeping only the > build dir read-write, and disabling network. That's for build, for install, > only the switch prefix should be rw, and the build dir ro. It's absolutely > not > secure for now, but it's a good start. > > With that, my idea for 2.0 was to provide a generic way to configure wrappers > for package commands in the different scopes, document how to put the > namespace > control in place, and do it on our automated tests on Linux: this would allow > to test the feature well, and provide a good sanity check, if nothing more > except for opt-in users. This would also allow to try implementations on > other > OSes (I am sure the Docker guys would be glad to help, this is their stuff > after all ? ;)). If successful, the next release could include it built-in. > > How does this sound ? that sounds great. Thanks for describing the current state! hannes _______________________________________________ opam-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ocaml.org/listinfo/opam-devel
