manifest: Enable cliwrap #830
Closed
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
This probably deserves higher visibility. Let's discuss it in Wednesday's community meeting. |
|
Filed meeting ticket at coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker#730. |
|
This was discussed in the community meeting:
|
cgwalters
force-pushed
the
enable-cliwrap
branch
from
9ee3bc5
to
1404c88
Compare
This functionality has been around for quite a while in rpm-ostree but I'm not aware of anyone using it. I'd like to turn it on here so we can gain the benefits, which right now are better protection against non-ostree-aware commands run as root (`rpm` and `dracut` namely). A bit more in coreos/rpm-ostree#1789
cgwalters
force-pushed
the
enable-cliwrap
branch
from
1404c88
to
46151a3
Compare
|
OK rebased 🏄 on next-devel per discussion. |
|
So because of how the branches are setup, to only turn this on for
|
|
Ahh right OK. And we should e.g. |
Yeah, exactly (maybe just |
|
OK I thought about this more, and I think a better way to go about getting small-scale real world testing for cliwrap is to make it easier to enable client side. We can circle back to enabling it by default later. |
cgwalters
added a commit
to cgwalters/rpm-ostree
that referenced
this pull request
May 14, 2021
This is a better alternative to coreos/fedora-coreos-config#830 Basically rather than trying to send this out to all FCOS users, it's much saner to allow people to opt-in to it locally. If we'd finished coreos#2326 then this would be something as trivial as: ``` $ echo 'cliwrap: true' > /etc/rpm-ostree.d/cliwrap.yaml $ rpm-ostree rebuild ``` Unfortunately that's not the world we live in, so a whole lot of layers here need crossing to just propagate a boolean. And it interacts in a tricky way with our change detection code. But, it works and will allow people to try this out. Other fixed problems: - Our `rpm --verify` wrapping was broken - Dropping privileges clashed with the default directory being `/root`, so `chdir(/)` too
cgwalters
added a commit
to cgwalters/rpm-ostree
that referenced
this pull request
May 18, 2021
This is a better alternative to coreos/fedora-coreos-config#830 Basically rather than trying to send this out to all FCOS users, it's much saner to allow people to opt-in to it locally. If we'd finished coreos#2326 then this would be something as trivial as: ``` $ echo 'cliwrap: true' > /etc/rpm-ostree.d/cliwrap.yaml $ rpm-ostree rebuild ``` Unfortunately that's not the world we live in, so a whole lot of layers here need crossing to just propagate a boolean. And it interacts in a tricky way with our change detection code. But, it works and will allow people to try this out. Other fixed problems: - Our `rpm --verify` wrapping was broken - Dropping privileges clashed with the default directory being `/root`, so `chdir(/)` too
cgwalters
added a commit
to cgwalters/rpm-ostree
that referenced
this pull request
May 18, 2021
This is a better alternative to coreos/fedora-coreos-config#830 Basically rather than trying to send this out to all FCOS users, it's much saner to allow people to opt-in to it locally. If we'd finished coreos#2326 then this would be something as trivial as: ``` $ echo 'cliwrap: true' > /etc/rpm-ostree.d/cliwrap.yaml $ rpm-ostree rebuild ``` Unfortunately that's not the world we live in, so a whole lot of layers here need crossing to just propagate a boolean. And it interacts in a tricky way with our change detection code. But, it works and will allow people to try this out. Other fixed problems: - Our `rpm --verify` wrapping was broken - Dropping privileges clashed with the default directory being `/root`, so `chdir(/)` too
cgwalters
added a commit
to cgwalters/rpm-ostree
that referenced
this pull request
May 19, 2021
This is a better alternative to coreos/fedora-coreos-config#830 Basically rather than trying to send this out to all FCOS users, it's much saner to allow people to opt-in to it locally. If we'd finished coreos#2326 then this would be something as trivial as: ``` $ echo 'cliwrap: true' > /etc/rpm-ostree.d/cliwrap.yaml $ rpm-ostree rebuild ``` Unfortunately that's not the world we live in, so a whole lot of layers here need crossing to just propagate a boolean. And it interacts in a tricky way with our change detection code. But, it works and will allow people to try this out. Other fixed problems: - Our `rpm --verify` wrapping was broken - Dropping privileges clashed with the default directory being `/root`, so `chdir(/)` too
cgwalters
added a commit
to cgwalters/rpm-ostree
that referenced
this pull request
May 19, 2021
This is a better alternative to coreos/fedora-coreos-config#830 Basically rather than trying to send this out to all FCOS users, it's much saner to allow people to opt-in to it locally. If we'd finished coreos#2326 then this would be something as trivial as: ``` $ echo 'cliwrap: true' > /etc/rpm-ostree.d/cliwrap.yaml $ rpm-ostree rebuild ``` Unfortunately that's not the world we live in, so a whole lot of layers here need crossing to just propagate a boolean. And it interacts in a tricky way with our change detection code. But, it works and will allow people to try this out. Other fixed problems: - Our `rpm --verify` wrapping was broken - Dropping privileges clashed with the default directory being `/root`, so `chdir(/)` too
cgwalters
added a commit
to cgwalters/rpm-ostree
that referenced
this pull request
May 19, 2021
This is a better alternative to coreos/fedora-coreos-config#830 Basically rather than trying to send this out to all FCOS users, it's much saner to allow people to opt-in to it locally. If we'd finished coreos#2326 then this would be something as trivial as: ``` $ echo 'cliwrap: true' > /etc/rpm-ostree.d/cliwrap.yaml $ rpm-ostree rebuild ``` Unfortunately that's not the world we live in, so a whole lot of layers here need crossing to just propagate a boolean. And it interacts in a tricky way with our change detection code. But, it works and will allow people to try this out. Other fixed problems: - Our `rpm --verify` wrapping was broken - Dropping privileges clashed with the default directory being `/root`, so `chdir(/)` too
cgwalters
added a commit
to cgwalters/rpm-ostree
that referenced
this pull request
May 19, 2021
This is a better alternative to coreos/fedora-coreos-config#830 Basically rather than trying to send this out to all FCOS users, it's much saner to allow people to opt-in to it locally. If we'd finished coreos#2326 then this would be something as trivial as: ``` $ echo 'cliwrap: true' > /etc/rpm-ostree.d/cliwrap.yaml $ rpm-ostree rebuild ``` Unfortunately that's not the world we live in, so a whole lot of layers here need crossing to just propagate a boolean. And it interacts in a tricky way with our change detection code. But, it works and will allow people to try this out. Other fixed problems: - Our `rpm --verify` wrapping was broken - Dropping privileges clashed with the default directory being `/root`, so `chdir(/)` too
jlebon
added a commit
to jlebon/fedora-coreos-config
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 16, 2024
As part of the bootable containers effort, we want to put emphasis on a consistent experience when deriving images. A big part of that is being able to type `dnf install -y ...` in one's `Containerfile`. Let's turn on cliwrap for this. This was previously agreed[[1]], but we ended never shipping it since there was a less invasive way to test it.[[2]] Eventually, once dnf5 is ready, it could take on this role (including package layering on the client-side), at which point we will no longer need to wrap it. [1]: coreos#830 (comment) [2]: coreos#830 (comment)
jlebon
added a commit
to jlebon/fedora-coreos-config
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 16, 2024
As part of the bootable containers effort, we want to put emphasis on a consistent experience when deriving images. A big part of that is being able to type `dnf install -y ...` in one's `Containerfile`. Let's turn on cliwrap for this. This was previously agreed[[1]], but we ended never shipping it since there was a less invasive way to test it.[[2]] Here, we bundle it as part of the Fedora 40 change. This will naturally allow it to bake in `branched` and `next` for a while before making it to `stable`. Eventually, once dnf5 is ready, it could take on this role (including package layering on the client-side), at which point we will no longer need to wrap it. [1]: coreos#830 (comment) [2]: coreos#830 (comment)
jlebon
added a commit
to jlebon/fedora-coreos-config
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 16, 2024
As part of the bootable containers effort, we want to put emphasis on a consistent experience when deriving images. A big part of that is being able to type `dnf install -y ...` in one's `Containerfile`. Let's turn on cliwrap for this. This was previously agreed[[1]], but we ended never shipping it since there was a less invasive way to test it.[[2]] Here, we bundle it as part of the Fedora 40 rebase. This will naturally allow it to bake in `branched` and `next` for a while before making it to `stable`. Eventually, once dnf5 is ready, it could take on this role (including package layering on the client-side), at which point we will no longer need to wrap it. [1]: coreos#830 (comment) [2]: coreos#830 (comment)
jlebon
added a commit
to jlebon/fedora-coreos-config
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 16, 2024
As part of the bootable containers effort, we want to put emphasis on a consistent experience when deriving images. A big part of that is being able to type `dnf install -y ...` in one's `Containerfile`. Let's turn on cliwrap for this. This was previously agreed[[1]], but we ended never shipping it since there was a less invasive way to test it.[[2]] Here, we bundle it as part of the Fedora 40 rebase. This will naturally allow it to bake in `branched` and `next` for a while before making it to `stable`. Eventually, once dnf5 is ready, it could take on this role (including package layering on the client-side), at which point we will no longer need to wrap it. [1]: coreos#830 (comment) [2]: coreos#830 (comment)
jlebon
added a commit
to jlebon/fedora-coreos-config
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 16, 2024
As part of the bootable containers effort, we want to put emphasis on a consistent experience when deriving images. A big part of that is being able to type `dnf install -y ...` in one's `Containerfile`. Let's turn on cliwrap for this. This was previously agreed[[1]], but we ended never shipping it since there was a less invasive way to test it.[[2]] Here, we bundle it as part of the Fedora 40 rebase. This will naturally allow it to bake in `branched` and `next` for a while before making it to `stable`. Eventually, once dnf5 is ready, it could take on this role (including package layering on the client-side), at which point we will no longer need to wrap it. [1]: coreos#830 (comment) [2]: coreos#830 (comment)
jlebon
added a commit
to jlebon/fedora-coreos-config
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 22, 2024
As part of the bootable containers effort, we want to put emphasis on a consistent experience when deriving images. A big part of that is being able to type `dnf install -y ...` in one's `Containerfile`. Let's turn on cliwrap for this. This was previously agreed[[1]], but we ended never shipping it since there was a less invasive way to test it.[[2]] Here, we bundle it as part of the Fedora 40 rebase. This will naturally allow it to bake in `branched` and `next` for a while before making it to `stable`. Eventually, once dnf5 is ready, it could take on this role (including package layering on the client-side), at which point we will no longer need to wrap it. [1]: coreos#830 (comment) [2]: coreos#830 (comment)
jlebon
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 26, 2024
As part of the bootable containers effort, we want to put emphasis on a consistent experience when deriving images. A big part of that is being able to type `dnf install -y ...` in one's `Containerfile`. Let's turn on cliwrap for this. This was previously agreed[[1]], but we ended never shipping it since there was a less invasive way to test it.[[2]] Here, we bundle it as part of the Fedora 40 rebase. This will naturally allow it to bake in `branched` and `next` for a while before making it to `stable`. Eventually, once dnf5 is ready, it could take on this role (including package layering on the client-side), at which point we will no longer need to wrap it. [1]: #830 (comment) [2]: #830 (comment)
aaradhak
pushed a commit
to aaradhak/fedora-coreos-config
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 18, 2024
As part of the bootable containers effort, we want to put emphasis on a consistent experience when deriving images. A big part of that is being able to type `dnf install -y ...` in one's `Containerfile`. Let's turn on cliwrap for this. This was previously agreed[[1]], but we ended never shipping it since there was a less invasive way to test it.[[2]] Here, we bundle it as part of the Fedora 40 rebase. This will naturally allow it to bake in `branched` and `next` for a while before making it to `stable`. Eventually, once dnf5 is ready, it could take on this role (including package layering on the client-side), at which point we will no longer need to wrap it. [1]: coreos#830 (comment) [2]: coreos#830 (comment)
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This functionality has been around for quite a while in rpm-ostree
but I'm not aware of anyone using it. I'd like to turn it
on here so we can gain the benefits, which right now are
better protection against non-ostree-aware commands run as
root (
rpmanddracutnamely).A bit more in coreos/rpm-ostree#1789
Closes coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker#730.