On Di, 08.10.24 11:42, Chris Adams (li...@cmadams.net) wrote: > Once upon a time, Lennart Poettering <mzerq...@0pointer.de> said: > > Oh, that hasn't been the case for a long time anymore. Nowadays files > > on disk are owned by the "nobody" user always, and idmapped mounts are > > used to map them transiently to the UID/GID assigned to the user on > > the local machine. > > How do rootless containers work (with subuid/subgid) in that setup?
I think subuid/subgid is highly problematic and should go away. We have better mechanisms these days, via idmapping (i.e. container files on disk should never be owned by the uid/gid ranges they are actually run in, but those should be dynamically allocated and mapped dynamically via idmapping to the physical UID/GID range on disk) That said, for compat with traditional subuid/subgid as per the table on https://systemd.io/UIDS-GIDS the UID/GID range 524288…1879048191 is mapped 1:1 on homed homes, thus if you use those things work as before. But again, just don't, subuid/subgid is a mistake if you ask me. Lennart -- Lennart Poettering, Berlin -- _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
