docs(deploy): verify Podman on Lima + fix container build portability#64
Merged
Conversation
…ortability Ran the eBPF egress guard under rootful Podman on a Lima VM (Ubuntu 24.04, kernel 6.8, cgroup v2, Podman 4.9.3): - Self-guard (default cgroupns, --cgroup-path /sys/fs/cgroup): kernel drops non-allowed egress, host egress intact. - Sidecar (--cgroupns host + the target's dedicated cgroup from podman inspect): guards the sibling, host egress intact. - Anti-pattern confirmed: --cgroupns host on a /sys/fs/cgroup attach binds the host root cgroup and cuts the host's own egress. Corrected the earlier self-guard example that wrongly carried --cgroupns host. Portability fixes surfaced while verifying: - Fully-qualify base/compose images (docker.io/library/...) so builds resolve under Podman's short-name policy (Docker unaffected). - Add .dockerignore so the build context excludes target/ (was ~6.6 GB). Signed-off-by: Ho Geun Choi <ohyes9711@gmail.com>
CharmingGroot
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 22, 2026
This file contains hidden or 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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Follow-up to #63 — actually ran the eBPF egress guard under Podman on a Lima VM and corrected the notes against what the kernel did.
Environment
Lima · Ubuntu 24.04 · kernel 6.8.0-134 · cgroup v2 · Podman 4.9.3 · arm64 · rootful + privileged.
Verified
podman run --privileged(default cgroupns),--cgroup-path /sys/fs/cgroup--cgroupns host+--cgroup-path /sys/fs/cgroup$(podman inspect … .State.CgroupPath)--cgroupns host+/sys/fs/cgroupDoc correction
The §5 example from #63 wrongly carried
--cgroupns hoston the self-guard command — that binds the host root cgroup and (verified) cuts the host's own egress. Rewritten: self-guard uses the default cgroupns;--cgroupns hostis documented only for the sidecar case, attaching to a dedicated cgroup path. Disclaimer upgraded from untested to verified on Lima.Build portability (surfaced while verifying)
docker.io/library/…indeploy/Dockerfile,deploy/proxy/Dockerfile, and the composecurlimage (Docker unaffected)..dockerignore→docker/podman buildsent the whole ~6.6 GB tree (hosttarget/). Added one; the verified image build ran with it.Scope
Docs + deploy packaging only. No crate/code changes; CI's
cargo-based jobs are unaffected.