add clone(CLONE_NEWUSER) test in spread-tests/regression/lp-1618683b #153
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There's an existing test that does this so I'm interested in knowing if we need both. Have a look at https://github.com/snapcore/snap-confine/blob/master/spread-tests/regression/lp-1618683/task.yaml
| execute: | | ||
| cd / | ||
| echo "We can clone(CLONE_NEWUSER) as a regular user and expect it to work" | ||
| /snap/bin/snapd-hacker-toolbelt.busybox sh -c 'clone-newuser-test' |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can you tell me what clone-newuser-test is and where does it come from?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
"Can you tell me what clone-newuser-test is and where does it come from?"
I addressed this in the PR: "This requires merging https://code.launchpad.net/~jdstrand/+git/snapd-hacker-toolbelt/+ref/master."
If you are wondering where that came from-- it came from me-- I wrote clone-newuser-test.c.
|
"There's an existing test that does this so I'm interested in knowing if we need both. Have a look at https://github.com/snapcore/snap-confine/blob/master/spread-tests/regression/lp-1618683/task.yaml" I thought I described this in the PR...: "There is already a test for 'unshare -U' in spread-tests/regression/lp-1618683, but the fix for LP: #1618683 also fixed clone(CLONE_NEWUSER), so let's add a test for that." Your unshare test specifies a devmode snap. The test in the PR works in strict mode. Could unshare be replaced by this test? Possibly, but testing in both devmode and strict mode seemed worthwhile. |
|
Thank you for the explanation, it makes sense now. |
|
I'll merge this for the next release. Thank you for writing this. |
There is already a test for 'unshare -U' in spread-tests/regression/lp-1618683, but the fix for LP: #1618683 also fixed clone(CLONE_NEWUSER), so let's add a test for that. This requires merging https://code.launchpad.net/~jdstrand/+git/snapd-hacker-toolbelt/+ref/master.