From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gentoo-dev+bounces-66486-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>
Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80])
by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 68A5B13877A
for <garchives@archives.gentoo.org>; Thu, 3 Jul 2014 16:02:39 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 87151E08DA;
Thu, 3 Jul 2014 16:02:34 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-ob0-f175.google.com (mail-ob0-f175.google.com [209.85.214.175])
(using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits))
(No client certificate requested)
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 963FCE087D
for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Thu, 3 Jul 2014 16:02:33 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-ob0-f175.google.com with SMTP id wm4so504221obc.20
for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Thu, 03 Jul 2014 09:02:32 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
h=sender:date:from:to:subject:message-id:mail-followup-to
:mime-version:content-type:content-disposition:user-agent;
bh=VSjiwxPWP9AcMq+jj/0fnBWJaXITpk+TAzi8csfH4wQ=;
b=Fu6ZQuU36Ss51oVd2Se+KBpDGXMBASEVm+/YNMueAZclk+4tHlHK4USx988SMekaml
bapj5IqWRq3mLDv2eHvvL2zni9BeZ7su8GSrL728952WB7YhnDHg91jVUlhiDdeaY0q+
CHA9BlXffb0l1IiiU0fIYZHAYxZt3Ts6oA0mAn1MUXP/DfD38RbZxyw5CUAATdeqjYCs
aPJIHrmgWAJjQ8RLZM2kwCpwizG3stph0d/2L1oWejvMgbehxAhGG8KL12xliWpAGHyn
PhjMdFp6joYse6pslSouGpUp1jF22tcwHiEP+nXNsdqgn0JKy+Y/1RDezhiANYxgMZtv
DozA==
X-Received: by 10.60.103.173 with SMTP id fx13mr5768215oeb.25.1404403352627;
Thu, 03 Jul 2014 09:02:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from linux1 (cpe-76-187-91-128.tx.res.rr.com. [76.187.91.128])
by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id v1sm56359454obt.23.2014.07.03.09.02.30
for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>
(version=TLSv1.2 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128);
Thu, 03 Jul 2014 09:02:31 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: William Hubbs <w.d.hubbs@gmail.com>
Received: (nullmailer pid 4318 invoked by uid 1000);
Thu, 03 Jul 2014 16:02:29 -0000
Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2014 11:02:29 -0500
From: William Hubbs <williamh@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo development <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>
Subject: [gentoo-dev] should /etc/init.d/sysctl be run in lxc guests?
Message-ID: <20140703160229.GA4189@linux1>
Mail-Followup-To: gentoo development <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-dev+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-dev.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="gKMricLos+KVdGMg"
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.22 (2013-10-16)
X-Archives-Salt: bd669d45-4f33-40a6-8a18-2f8e2881670e
X-Archives-Hash: e84df2005f497b5182e121f7c378f3b0
--gKMricLos+KVdGMg
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
This is a question to lxc users, since I don't run it.
I have a bug against OpenRC in which the user is saying that I should
allow /etc/init.d/sysctl to run inside an lxc container [1].
My understanding is that this is not a good idea since an lxc container
actually changes settings in the host's kernel.
The user's position seems to be that it should be up to the lxc
template or the sys admin to make sure they configure things correctly.
Does anyone have any thoughts? Is this something I should allow people
to shoot themselves in the foot with if they do something wrong?
Thanks,
William
[1] https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=516050
--gKMricLos+KVdGMg
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2
iEYEARECAAYFAlO1fpUACgkQblQW9DDEZThd3ACeMb3yjSZ9ah2j1ZbFw5rgRWjV
TZQAnj0RU02F6iVFrpF2FTMaqr+SlFKL
=Vpgs
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--gKMricLos+KVdGMg--