undefined

points

[-]

> If anyone knows how to run Codex inside a Docker container on Linux without it constantly complaining about a broken bubblewrap, please tell.

Why would you even use bubblewrap once it's running in a container? I've been running Codex in a container since it was publicly available, not even sure what you'd use bubblewrap for when you already separated codex from the rest of your filesystem?

by ab71e57 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

Doesn't it automatically use bwrap if it's installed (in the container in this case)?

by krzyk6 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

Don't install bubblewrap? I didn't and use codex in docker.

by bloak4 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

"Codex could not find bubblewrap on PATH. Install bubblewrap with your OS package manager. See the sandbox prerequisites: ... Codex will use the bundled bubblewrap in the meantime."

I think neither the bundled bubblewrap nor the Ubuntu 24.04 bubblewrap works properly under Docker with the default options ... Yes, I've just tested that by asking Codex to "Test that bubblewrap is working properly" and then "Test again" after apt-get install bubblewrap.

EDIT: So the solution is to run "codex --dangerously-bypass-approvals-and-sandbox" in a Docker container?

by sh34r3 hours ago|

prev|

[-]

You have to add Linux capabilities to support creating nested namespaces. IIRC SYS_ADMIN is required. If you do that, what do you think you’re achieving with the container? It defeats the entire purpose IMO, just makes development more inconvenient.

If you need the sandboxing capabilities provided by the application and don’t want to run it on the host, you should set up a VM, not a container.

From a systems perspective, it’s foolish to rely on a proprietary application to provide its own isolation guarantees. This is an OS-layer responsibility.

ML/AI experts suffer badly from hubris. They are brilliant in one domain. It transfers poorly to systems engineering. The proof is in the FelonyBench results.