-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.9k
[Fedore-CoreOS]Installation fail, no access to files in /etc/* #1505
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Comments
AFAIR Fedora CoreOS's filesystem is read-only after booting up and is more suitable for stateless applications (I'm not completely sure about this, so please correct me if I'm wrong). Scripts in this repository create docker volumes which gets created by default in Is there a specific necessity to use Fedora CoreOS for this? |
Jup, basically Fedora Core OS is the best way of having an docker only core system it reduces al overhead from other instances and allows automated management and deployment. that’s also the reason way there is an RO file system only as the best practise is to use docker volumes for storing data. Mso from that setup, having bindings is not the proper way of ga fling data. mis there any reason way we map the data here instead creating a volume ? The install script would still be possible to create volumes and push data into that which could be used across the related docker containers ? |
To add, no this is not the case all docker volumes are created just fine. Problems are the bindings we use in /etc/ which are not accessible by the docker engine. So moving alle data which currently has a binding would solve this behaviour |
Using volumes instead of bind mounts is not always the best scenario IMO.
In some cases we use bind mount, but it mounts the files in For example looking into this issue case ( self-hosted/docker-compose.yml Lines 198 to 204 in 6c88b78
So as you can see sentry is not trying to mount anything from Also a couple of other bind mounts:
|
Agree, but on fedora it is there is no way arround it as the docker service has no access to the file system (which is security wise a perfect solution. please also have a further look, the etc directory’s created by the script on a regular installation which is impossible on fedora my suggestion would be, that the installation script creates a config volume for this situation which would make the bindings not needed anymore and comply with the basic root setup of a secure docker root host. imagine an administrator can add any bind he want at the root system, an non wanted situation for scaling in generic I think having a proper solution for this kind of setups would be very benefitfull for the whole sentry community as fedora is the leading, docker only, main system which allows very easy no-touch deployment & zero touch maintenance (the whole host manage itself and only provides docker environments) as I am a security engineer, I am happy to assist/think or discuss this further but due to my missing knowledge of sentry itself it’s hard to define the solution by myself one thing as example I would like to try, is removing all the binds and make that central volume which will take over the binds. |
Fedora or Fedora CoreOS? I haven't used Fedora for the past couple of years, but I don't think Fedora has the same restrictions as Fedora CoreOS have.
Please read my comment again, self-hosted is not creating any directory inside host
(resisting to get into distro wars... 😅 )
I don't think having a couple of bind mounts (which some of them are files shipped from git and / or created by What do you propose for files shipped from git if we move to docker volumes? |
Fedora-Core OS is my current focus, sorry but no experience with fedora itself :)
understood, its part of the git clone folder structure
😆 😆 😆
I think moving to docker volumes would mean we we have to change the way/mindset how to manage/maintain containing files. Accessing the structure then could be archived by running the contain as run exec nano /xxx//file or accessing the terminal of this docker container. |
Sorry , but I don't think this is worth the effort. AFAIK Fedora CoreOS is not designed to run install scripts (like |
hmm i do not agree, running install scripts works fine also on fedora-core also used by other processes.
Of course I cannot judged about that, but I can imagine that may also in other distro's it could get an issue in long therm and still fedora-core is the leigth weightest and easiest to manage distro (regarding updates/deployment) in the available OS out there. |
@DutchmanNL I'm against this change myself, but I'm not a maintainer in this repository. We can wait for a maintainer to see their opinions. |
Oh wow I missed a lot here. 😬 I'm digging out of an inbox pile right now, I will circle back and digest this when I can ... |
no worries take your time :), happy to chat/interact if there are open questions or items :) |
This issue has gone three weeks without activity. In another week, I will close it. But! If you comment or otherwise update it, I will reset the clock, and if you label it "A weed is but an unloved flower." ― Ella Wheeler Wilcox 🥀 |
No stale please @chadwhitacre :) |
@ethanhs Should we start a meta-ticket for the installer rewrite to keep track? No longer stale here though not what you had in mind @DutchmanNL sorry 😅 |
Version
22.5
Steps to Reproduce
Expected Result
succesfull installation on fedora core-os
Actual Result
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: