Subject: Re: PR 36963
To: Bill Stouder-Studenmund <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Jan Danielsson <email@example.com>
Date: 09/23/2007 01:39:31
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Bill Stouder-Studenmund wrote:
>>> Hm. Here's a thought: if he's logging in on the console, init might be
>>> using a a file descriptor bound to the device node _outside_ the chroot.
>>> I can think of a few ways chaos could then ensue, given subtle bugs in
>>> the session-handling or device alias detection code...
>> By "chaos", do you mean "what you are currently seeing", or do you
>> mean "everything will be fubar Any Time Now"?
> I'm not Thor (nor do I play one on TV), but I suspect something more akin
> to "what you are currently seeing".
That's what I thought; but I tend to get a little pessimistic when my
system isn't working as I want it to. :)
> Since it seems to be the statvfs path munging code that's at issue, try
> putting printf()s in it indicating what's going on.
I will. On that note; do printf()'s end up in dmesg?
> As a total aside, I think that code is questionable in this case. The idea
> behind it is (I think) to hide mount points that aren't in the chroot, and
> to not leak info about the chroot path.
> As I understand this case, though, your chroot is the mount point. :-)
Hmm.. In this thread, I've detected a hint of the opinion that the
init.root sysctl is a bad idea to begin with. I guess I should have
asked first; but OTOH, it was a documented feature, so I didn't expect
it to blow up in my face this bad. :(
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (NetBSD)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----