Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

cannot access /dls/ops-data #38

Open
ronaldomercado opened this issue Jul 13, 2022 · 6 comments
Open

cannot access /dls/ops-data #38

ronaldomercado opened this issue Jul 13, 2022 · 6 comments

Comments

@ronaldomercado
Copy link
Contributor

The container does not load those folders.

This is only slightly inconvenient.

@MJGaughran
Copy link

MJGaughran commented Jul 13, 2022

Is it appropriate to load this folder by default for everyone? How do permissions work in this area?

You can add in additional mounts in your launch script. Perhaps we should include a command-line argument to provide additional mounts in the run-dev-c7.sh script?

It is worthwhile asking whether we want to completely replicate a RHEL7 workstation, or just provide the necessary functionality with some sensible restrictions?

@gilesknap
Copy link
Contributor

I like the idea of adding extra mounts on the command line options.

The permissions for any mounts should work as normal I believe since all SELinux and secondary groups are handled.

There is also no significant cost to adding mounts that I'm aware of (maybe slower startup for the first invocation) so we could add this one.

@MJGaughran
Copy link

I don't know what the permissions are like in the /dls/ops-data folder, but if I'm able to affect it at all I wouldn't want it included.

I would prefer being able to opt-in to or opt-out of these things. Even though dev-c7 is for general purpose use, I appreciate using it as a sandbox.

Obviously, we already have that problem elsewhere. I would personally vote for the ability to exclude things like read-write access to filesystems (excluding e.g. current directory) through command-line options, but I'm not going to be upset if other people disagree.

@gilesknap
Copy link
Contributor

@MJGaughran I don't have a problem with making the file system mounts configurable.

Do you mean you want Read only access to the full list or no access? Note that quite a bit of dls_sw is needed for many of our tools to work, but read only would be OK for most tools.

@MJGaughran
Copy link

I don't have an issue with read-only access.

@gilesknap
Copy link
Contributor

I think we need to make the mounts configurable see #57

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants