On Wednesday 02 March 2005 15:41, you wrote: > On Tuesday 01 March 2005 13:17, Maarten wrote:
> In fact I guess that the miss of modules was another, indipendent problem > (I boot most of my kernels after forgetting to install modules... I make > sure what I really need is compiled in). Yes, it was an unrelated problem. > > This is what I see on the host system: > > This is the usual symptom of a 2.6.9 / .10 host with a UML old enough to > not have the fixes. Vanilla 2.6.9 and 2.6.10 haven't them (some doubts > about 2.6.10). Thanks, I solved it yesterday. It was the missing SKAS patch. I got confused by the SKAS kernel help on the guest which states (in so many words) "it is safe to say yes here" but it really isn't, if the host kernel isn't patched for SKAS. Or so it seems... Applying your patch did the trick, and it applied cleanly to a non-vanilla (Gentoo) kernel. The Gentoo UML howto mentions nothing about SKAS mode neither about host kernel patching (or little). When reading the UML docs themselves it finally dawned on me I needed that. Everything works just fine now. Out of curiosity, is a 'default' SKAS-enabled guest (and without the host-fs kernel option) safe enough as a sandbox to let untrusted users in, or are additional measures in order to really secure it (or more paranoia ;-) ? Ie. how difficult is it to gain access to the host OS from the UML guest? Thanks! Maarten -- bash-2.05b$ emerge ncy ------------------------------------------------------- SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users. Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click _______________________________________________ User-mode-linux-user mailing list User-mode-linux-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/user-mode-linux-user
