Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > linux.debian.kernel > #81342 > unrolled thread

why do I have to use backports kernel to make LXC work on Bookworm?

Started byHarald Dunkel <harri@afaics.de>
First post2023-12-28 14:30 +0100
Last post2023-12-29 13:50 +0100
Articles 4 — 2 participants

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.kernel


Contents

  why do I have to use backports kernel to make LXC work on Bookworm? Harald Dunkel <harri@afaics.de> - 2023-12-28 14:30 +0100
    Re: why do I have to use backports kernel to make LXC work on  Bookworm? Salvatore Bonaccorso <carnil@debian.org> - 2023-12-28 14:50 +0100
      Re: why do I have to use backports kernel to make LXC work on  Bookworm? Harald Dunkel <harri@afaics.de> - 2023-12-28 17:20 +0100
        Re: why do I have to use backports kernel to make LXC work on  Bookworm? Salvatore Bonaccorso <carnil@debian.org> - 2023-12-29 13:50 +0100

#81342 — why do I have to use backports kernel to make LXC work on Bookworm?

FromHarald Dunkel <harri@afaics.de>
Date2023-12-28 14:30 +0100
Subjectwhy do I have to use backports kernel to make LXC work on Bookworm?
Message-ID<HPYCt-gGII-1@gated-at.bofh.it>
Hi folks,

apparently LXC is affected by a bug around apparmor support for months,
see #1052934 and #1050256. The workaround is to set PrivateNetwork=false
(set by default as a security measure) or to use a backports kernel.

AFAIU reason is a bug in 6.1. The fix (1cf26c3d2c4c) is not a one-liner,
but reasonably small, and it has already been verified, so how comes it
is still in the loop for weeks?


Regards

Harri

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]


#81343 — Re: why do I have to use backports kernel to make LXC work on Bookworm?

FromSalvatore Bonaccorso <carnil@debian.org>
Date2023-12-28 14:50 +0100
SubjectRe: why do I have to use backports kernel to make LXC work on Bookworm?
Message-ID<HPYVP-gGPl-1@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#81342
Hi,

On Thu, Dec 28, 2023 at 02:13:28PM +0100, Harald Dunkel wrote:
> Hi folks,
> 
> apparently LXC is affected by a bug around apparmor support for months,
> see #1052934 and #1050256. The workaround is to set PrivateNetwork=false
> (set by default as a security measure) or to use a backports kernel.
> 
> AFAIU reason is a bug in 6.1. The fix (1cf26c3d2c4c) is not a one-liner,
> but reasonably small, and it has already been verified, so how comes it
> is still in the loop for weeks?

Because it needs backporting work in 6.1.y upstream, which for John
Johansen aimed to work on. You can read about the history and backlog
in #1050256 . So far I have not got a reply from John on
https://bugs.debian.org/1050256#215 .

Regards,
Salvatore

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#81344 — Re: why do I have to use backports kernel to make LXC work on Bookworm?

FromHarald Dunkel <harri@afaics.de>
Date2023-12-28 17:20 +0100
SubjectRe: why do I have to use backports kernel to make LXC work on Bookworm?
Message-ID<HQ1h0-gIkw-3@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#81343
On 2023-12-28 14:40:30, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote:
> 
> Because it needs backporting work in 6.1.y upstream, which for John
> Johansen aimed to work on. You can read about the history and backlog
> in #1050256 . So far I have not got a reply from John on
> https://bugs.debian.org/1050256#215 .
> 

Oh, I thought he's a Debian maintainer. My bad.

Thank you very much for your fast response.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#81347 — Re: why do I have to use backports kernel to make LXC work on Bookworm?

FromSalvatore Bonaccorso <carnil@debian.org>
Date2023-12-29 13:50 +0100
SubjectRe: why do I have to use backports kernel to make LXC work on Bookworm?
Message-ID<HQktj-gTub-1@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#81344
Hi Herald,

On Thu, Dec 28, 2023 at 05:17:48PM +0100, Harald Dunkel wrote:
> On 2023-12-28 14:40:30, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote:
> > 
> > Because it needs backporting work in 6.1.y upstream, which for John
> > Johansen aimed to work on. You can read about the history and backlog
> > in #1050256 . So far I have not got a reply from John on
> > https://bugs.debian.org/1050256#215 .
> > 
> 
> Oh, I thought he's a Debian maintainer. My bad.
> 
> Thank you very much for your fast response.

No problem! I will let some day pass and then ping him again to ask
after the "holiday season". I think even if someone else will propose
a target backport Greg will want an ack from the apparmor maintainers,
and John ist the sole one listed n the upstream MAINTAINERS file:

APPARMOR SECURITY MODULE
M:      John Johansen <john.johansen@canonical.com>
M:      John Johansen <john@apparmor.net>
L:      apparmor@lists.ubuntu.com (moderated for non-subscribers)
S:      Supported
W:      apparmor.net
B:      https://gitlab.com/apparmor/apparmor-kernel
C:      irc://irc.oftc.net/apparmor
T:      git git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jj/linux-apparmor
T:      https://gitlab.com/apparmor/apparmor-kernel.git
F:      Documentation/admin-guide/LSM/apparmor.rst
F:      security/apparmor/

I hope we can make it for the next point release.

Regards,
Salvatore

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]


Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.kernel


csiph-web