#47106 - Bubblewrap hates Guix containers 😞

Package	Source(s)		Maintainer(s)
guix		PTS Buildd Popcon

Message #41 received at 47106@debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox, reply):

Received: (at 47106) by debbugs.gnu.org; 15 Mar 2021 10:14:20 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Mon Mar 15 06:14:20 2021
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:34913 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
	by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
	(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org>)
	id 1lLkEu-00081g-G8
	for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 15 Mar 2021 06:14:20 -0400
Received: from mailrelay.tugraz.at ([129.27.2.202]:43179)
 by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
 (envelope-from <leo.prikler@student.tugraz.at>) id 1lLkEq-00081T-Bc
 for 47106@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 15 Mar 2021 06:14:18 -0400
Received: from nijino.local (217-149-164-20.nat.highway.telekom.at
 [217.149.164.20])
 by mailrelay.tugraz.at (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4DzXMS74RTz1LZ3K;
 Mon, 15 Mar 2021 11:14:12 +0100 (CET)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 mailrelay.tugraz.at 4DzXMS74RTz1LZ3K
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=tugraz.at;
 s=mailrelay; t=1615803253;
 bh=EOaG+LN6PE0xPrZwwhxpbrQIEUASi8l5Qlp+VW/EoAw=;
 h=Subject:From:To:Cc:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
 b=Ht55gR9+fQ6Ehfn+CuUhbIJss6ogoWUoKO4VHE6UCjw8jhtYwji4DR1NPbzRnQlVd
 pUZiR2xfU9mQAf5JfwpZiYUA8GBC4NFthzqTOTfUI9uEwFMUccPWdm6LBS8TLDpIg1
 46V4Dbigerx0wtblpTsNZQD1Xoukv8wqj9EgScek=
Message-ID: <b7e184f6a0ceece097f9fc3f25cb47a0ccdf6d34.camel@student.tugraz.at>
Subject: Re: bug#47106: Bubblewrap hates Guix containers
 😞
From: Leo Prikler <leo.prikler@student.tugraz.at>
To: Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org>
Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2021 11:14:11 +0100
In-Reply-To: <87pn00iw1f.fsf@gnu.org>
References: <fbb3401a61ae78f092b33b7a36428f8520a7a6bd.camel@student.tugraz.at>
 <87r1kjpbvx.fsf@gnu.org>
 <2922127e61435e64f95d3d398ef6932a02336188.camel@student.tugraz.at>
 <20210313122718.GA11708@LionPure>
 <fa11fb1fb6dfb6e2c048d4fe8dec005e3b2b114a.camel@student.tugraz.at>
 <20210313170704.GA3712@LionPure>
 <a4efcc5c7928de5d89596500803dee510d85b7c0.camel@student.tugraz.at>
 <20210314174539.GA10548@LionPure>
 <d0638eba7e63c71edd4267c1675e0ea7f5b7b4ae.camel@student.tugraz.at>
 <87sg4xlbn0.fsf@gnu.org>
 <6c6b39f495962ec906255cac212b66962d549eab.camel@student.tugraz.at>
 <87pn00iw1f.fsf@gnu.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
User-Agent: Evolution 3.34.2 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-TUG-Backscatter-control: bt4lQm5Tva3SBgCuw0EnZw
X-Spam-Scanner: SpamAssassin 3.003001 
X-Spam-Score-relay: -1.9
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.74 on 129.27.10.116
X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--)
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 47106
Cc: 47106@debbugs.gnu.org, Bengt Richter <bokr@bokr.com>
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, 
 <mailto:debbugs-submit-request@debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request@debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, 
 <mailto:debbugs-submit-request@debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---)

Am Montag, den 15.03.2021, 10:52 +0100 schrieb Ludovic Courtès:
> Hi Leo,
> 
> Leo Prikler <leo.prikler@student.tugraz.at> skribis:
> 
> > > /sys is already mounted inside ‘guix environment -C’ containers
> > > so I
> > > don’t see what difference it would make.
> > I think I've been told this several times, but I don't believe
> > it.  Not
> > adding all these expose=/sys lines triggers the "warnings" in the
> > original post.  (Okay, perhaps one of /sys/dev and /sys/devices is
> > superfluous, I would need to check.)
> 
> It would be great if you could pinpoint which of these --
> expose=/sys/xyz
> makes a difference.  From there we could compare the output of ‘find
> /sys/xyz’ inside and outside the container, without --expose.
Okay, so here's my basic workflow: Starting with an empty set of --
expose:
bwrap: Can't find source path /sys/block: No such file or directory
repeated a few times along with warnings, that the web process crashed
until finally Epiphany itself crashes. 
I add /sys/block, and Epiphany miraculously doesn't crash, but bwrap
still complains and the web processes still crash, so we march on. 
I'll abbreviate it a little and only show the error messages.
bwrap: Can't find source path /sys/bus: No such file or directory
bwrap: Can't find source path /sys/class: No such file or directory 
bwrap: Can't find source path /sys/dev: No such file or directory 
bwrap: Can't find source path /sys/devices: No such file or directory

After exposing all of the above, I get
Unable to init server: Could not connect: Connection refused

(WebKitWebProcess:2): Gtk-WARNING **: 10:09:01.497: cannot open
display: :1
Using --share instead of --expose for the final set does not seem to
change anything.

For /sys/block, the find inside the container is empty before exposing
it and non-empty on the host.  I assume the same holds for the others.

Regards,
Leo

Display info messages

Send a report that this bug log contains spam.

debbugs.gnu.org maintainers <help-debbugs@gnu.org>. Last modified: Sun Dec 22 09:22:43 2024; Machine Name: wallace-server

GNU bug tracking system

Debbugs is free software and licensed under the terms of the GNU Public License version 2. The current version can be obtained from https://bugs.debian.org/debbugs-source/.

#47106 Bubblewrap hates Guix containers 😞