Pflask does not mount a tmpfs on /tmp in the container. I did this, which works:
pflask --keepenv --mount=bind:/tmp/.X11-unix/X0:/tmp/.X11-unix/X0 --no-utsns --no-ipcns --no-netns --caps=all,-sys_admin,-sys_boot,-sys_chroot,-sys_ptrace,-sys_time,-sys_tty_config,-chown,-kill,-dac_override,-dac_read_search,-fowner,-setfcap,-setpcap,-net_admin,-mknod,-sys_module,-sys_nice,-sys_resource --no-userns --chroot=/mnt/sdc2/containers/sh0/container -- /ec-run sh0 sakura
...the relevant part is "--mount=bind:/tmp/.X11-unix/X0:/tmp/.X11-unix/X0", don't bother about the rest of the line.
However, what I would prefer is to mount a tmpfs on /tmp, then do the X0 bind:
pflask --keepenv --mount=tmp:/tmp --mount=bind:/tmp/.X11-unix/X0:/tmp/.X11-unix/X0 --no-utsns --no-ipcns --no-netns --caps=all,-sys_admin,-sys_boot,-sys_chroot,-sys_ptrace,-sys_time,-sys_tty_config,-chown,-kill,-dac_override,-dac_read_search,-fowner,-setfcap,-setpcap,-net_admin,-mknod,-sys_module,-sys_nice,-sys_resource --no-userns --chroot=/mnt/sdc2/containers/sh0/container -- /ec-run sh0 sakura
[✘] Could not create mount dest /mnt/sdc2/containers/sh0/container/tmp/.X11-unix/X0: No such file or directory
[✘] Child failed with code '1'
Am I being unrealistic here? Is this just the way it works, or could the code be made to accommodate what I have tried to do? I don't want to bind the entire host /tmp into the container.
Pflask does not mount a tmpfs on /tmp in the container. I did this, which works:
pflask --keepenv --mount=bind:/tmp/.X11-unix/X0:/tmp/.X11-unix/X0 --no-utsns --no-ipcns --no-netns --caps=all,-sys_admin,-sys_boot,-sys_chroot,-sys_ptrace,-sys_time,-sys_tty_config,-chown,-kill,-dac_override,-dac_read_search,-fowner,-setfcap,-setpcap,-net_admin,-mknod,-sys_module,-sys_nice,-sys_resource --no-userns --chroot=/mnt/sdc2/containers/sh0/container -- /ec-run sh0 sakura...the relevant part is "--mount=bind:/tmp/.X11-unix/X0:/tmp/.X11-unix/X0", don't bother about the rest of the line.
However, what I would prefer is to mount a tmpfs on /tmp, then do the X0 bind:
Am I being unrealistic here? Is this just the way it works, or could the code be made to accommodate what I have tried to do? I don't want to bind the entire host /tmp into the container.