Skip to content
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

config-linux.md: clearly require absolute path for namespace #720

Merged

Conversation

Mashimiao
Copy link

Signed-off-by: Ma Shimiao mashimiao.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com

Signed-off-by: Ma Shimiao <mashimiao.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>
@Mashimiao Mashimiao changed the title config-linux.ms: clearly require absolute path for namespace config-linux.md: clearly require absolute path for namespace Mar 10, 2017
@Mashimiao Mashimiao force-pushed the config-linux-fix-namespace-path branch from 9344c16 to 72cbff6 Compare March 10, 2017 04:01
@crosbymichael
Copy link
Member

crosbymichael commented Mar 10, 2017

LGTM

Approved with PullApprove

1 similar comment
@vbatts
Copy link
Member

vbatts commented Mar 10, 2017

LGTM

Approved with PullApprove

@vbatts vbatts merged commit 55e1a84 into opencontainers:master Mar 10, 2017
@vbatts vbatts mentioned this pull request Jul 5, 2017
wking added a commit to wking/opencontainer-runtime-spec that referenced this pull request Sep 28, 2017
The old language is from 72cbff6 (config-linux.md: clearly require
absolute path for namespace, 2017-03-10, opencontainers#720), but without RFC 2119
language in the absolute path wording, it's not a compliance
requirement (per spec.md's "compliant" definition).  This commit
adjusts the language to bring it in line with our current wording for
maskedPaths and readonlyPaths, which we've had since 25f44dd (
config-linux: fix format and definitely require value of masked and
readonly paths, 2016-09-30, opencontainers#587).

Signed-off-by: W. Trevor King <wking@tremily.us>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants