Re: What to use in place of abstract unix sockets?

12.12.2021 0:57, James Gritton wrote:

> On 2021-12-11 08:55, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
>> That said, implementing 'abstract' unix socket addresses would be nice.
> 
> Though if that were to happen, I would want to separate the namespaces
> of the abstract sockets.  This seems an analog to the POSIX shm
> pseudo-file namespace, which has similar names that aren't really
> files (though they still follow a file-like naming scheme).
> 
> And then we'd be back where we are now, with a way to add a socket to
> a jail's namespace, but requiring per-jail sockets (because there is
> no abstract namespace hard-link).

It would still be usable for chrooted application as opposed to jailed.

As for jails, we could introduce new jail attribute that makes it abstract socket namespace isolated
or shared with global one.