From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [IPv6:2a01:7e0:0:424::9]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4F0791FF137 for ; Tue, 03 Mar 2026 12:51:24 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 1ED0D142E6; Tue, 3 Mar 2026 12:52:26 +0100 (CET) Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2026 12:52:19 +0100 From: Wolfgang Bumiller To: Filip Schauer Subject: Re: [PATCH container 7/8] implement per-mountpoint uid/gid mapping Message-ID: References: <20260223130706.90972-1-f.schauer@proxmox.com> <20260223130706.90972-8-f.schauer@proxmox.com> <7qfxzacabicb4nqa7dd3lg4yxy5te2wd7kzbc5ygeztk5ttdik@4wqxerxngumw> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2 X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1772538715732 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL -0.982 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% DMARC_MISSING 0.1 Missing DMARC policy KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_CERTIFIED_BLOCKED 0.66 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to Validity was blocked. See https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more information. RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED 0.968 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to Validity was blocked. See https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more information. RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_SAFE_BLOCKED 0.495 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to Validity was blocked. See https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more information. SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record Message-ID-Hash: MLE56B2EFNO2HC5AHY6MQSA37D3PW633 X-Message-ID-Hash: MLE56B2EFNO2HC5AHY6MQSA37D3PW633 X-MailFrom: w.bumiller@proxmox.com X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; loop; banned-address; emergency; member-moderation; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header CC: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.10 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: On Mon, Mar 02, 2026 at 07:05:09PM +0100, Filip Schauer wrote: > On 02/03/2026 17:37, Filip Schauer wrote: > > On 27/02/2026 16:33, Wolfgang Bumiller wrote: > > > We probably want a way to just say "undo the container user > > > namespace". The pre-start hook gets a `$namespaces` hash passed as 3rd > > > parameter, we can just open the user namespace fd there for this > > > purpose. > > > > When `lxc.hook.version = 0` (which seems to be the default), $namespaces > > remains empty. So yes, we could try to get the namespace fd from > > $namespaces, but we would just have to fall back to obtaining the > > namespace manually unless `lxc.hook.version = 1` is set explicitly. > > Or we could fix `PVE::LXC::Tools::lxc_hook`, such that it always finds > the namespaces. That. Alternatively, I'm not sure containers really "work fine" with PVE if people override `lxc.hook.*` manually, so maybe we should consider dropping those from the list of valid custom keys and just force version 1? If that's not an option, maybe we should add `lxc.hook.${hook}.version` settings to lxc for per-hook versioning...