"Thompson, David" <dthomps...@worcester.edu> skribis:
> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 4:51 PM, Ludovic Courtès <l...@gnu.org> wrote:
>> "Thompson, David" <dthomps...@worcester.edu> skribis:
>>
>>> I noticed that 'guix environment --container --network' didn't work on
>>> an Ubuntu machine I was on, and the culprit was remounting things like
>>> /etc/resolv.conf read-only after the initial bind mount.
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>> (file-system-mapping
>>> (source file)
>>> (target file)
>>> - (writable? #f))))
>>> + ;; An unpriviliged user might
>>> not
>>> + ;; be able to remount
>>> + ;; /etc/resolv.conf as
>>> read-only,
>>> + ;; so we say that it is
>>> writable
>>> + ;; here, even though in
>>> practice
>>> + ;; it is not.
>>> + (writable? #t))))
>>> %network-configuration-files)
>>
>> Not sure I understand: why would bind-mounting /etc/resolv.conf
>> read-only fail?
>
> I haven't figured out the exact reason yet, but here's a strace
> snippet as proof:
>
> [pid 11334] mount("/etc/resolv.conf",
> "/tmp/guix-directory.Rc4nc6//etc/resolv.conf", 0x23da000,
> MS_RDONLY|MS_BIND, NULL) = 0
> [pid 11334] mount("/etc/resolv.conf",
> "/tmp/guix-directory.Rc4nc6//etc/resolv.conf", 0x23e4080,
> MS_RDONLY|MS_REMOUNT|MS_BIND, NULL) = -1 EPERM (Operation not
> permitted)
>
> Another Ubuntu user was able to reproduce this as well.
Looking at the resolvconf man page that Drew mentioned, it seems that
/etc/resolv.conf is a symlink when resolvconf is in used, right?
If yes, does this make a difference:
diff --git a/gnu/build/file-systems.scm b/gnu/build/file-systems.scm
index 58ccf59..a329eeb 100644
--- a/gnu/build/file-systems.scm
+++ b/gnu/build/file-systems.scm
@@ -378,7 +378,7 @@ corresponds to the symbols listed in FLAGS."
(define (regular-file? file-name)
"Return #t if FILE-NAME is a regular file."
- (eq? (stat:type (stat file-name)) 'regular))
+ (memq (stat:type (stat file-name)) '(regular symlink)))
(define* (mount-file-system spec #:key (root "/root"))
"Mount the file system described by SPEC under ROOT. SPEC must have the
It may be that the result after this is that you get /etc/resolv.conf in
the container, but it’s a dangling symlink. But isn’t it the case
already with the patch you propose?
Thanks for finding all these curiosities. :-)
Ludo’.
