This one is slightly more interesting. You need 1.8 (or patched <1.8 as per the previous thread) for this one to make sense; without it you're just going to get drowned in warning messages and not see the real issue.
This one is the real issue :-) In go, when calling syscall.Exec to a setuid root binary, sometimes (about 4% of the times, on my machine, but it's hardware- and load-dependent), the exec'ed process will find itself running with effective uid different to zero. That is, a setuid root binary will find itself running as non-root. As the process that sets up confinement is setuid root (in distros where setuid is favoured over capabilities), this means the snap app falls on its face. TODO: check if something similar happens when using caps This is *probably* a bug in Go, but it only seems to arise when using syscall.Exec, which as far as I can tell is unsupported (the whole syscall package is unsupported -- not covered by the go1 compatibility promise -- and its replacement, golang.org/x/sys/unix, is ominously missing Exec). Having said that, it might be a bug in the kernel ;-) And I say this because if you pin the process to a single cpu, the issue doesn't arise. Anyway, code to repro this is at https://gist.github.com/chipaca/806c90d96c437444f27f45a83d00a813 on my machine, $ for i in `seq -w 9999`; do ./a_c; done | wc -l 0 $ for i in `seq -w 9999`; do ./a_go; done | wc -l 394 And, $ for i in `seq -w 9999`; do taskset 2 ./a_go; done | wc -l 0 Gnarly! -- Snapcraft mailing list Snapcraft@lists.snapcraft.io Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/snapcraft