Re: Luaproc

[Ken Smith <kgsmith@...>]

On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 2:04 PM, Alexandre Skyrme
<askyrme@inf.puc-rio.br> wrote:

> i'd be grateful if you could post any further information you might find
> relevant to reproduce this condition.

I will gladly post any new information as I get it.

One thing though that had me considering the alternatives is the fact
that the main process can't participate in message passing, only child
processes may pass messages to each other.  This architecture doesn't
work for me because I have a lot of C++ code exposed to the primary
Lua process using Luabind.  The child processes don't get this
binding.

Why does Luaproc prevent the primary Lua process to participate in
message passing?

In my application, I basically want to spawn a Lua process sandbox to
deal with some end user code.  As such, I want to remove global
symbols that expose potential vulnerabilities.  I have read the advice
on the wiki about how to do this and I believe I can accomplish this
with Luaproc.  And the reason I want to run this concurrently is so
that I can limit the amount of time the process has to accomplish its
task and end it prematurely if necessary.


My team had difficulty building Lanes on all the platforms we care
about so I have presently resigned myself to rolling my own concurrent
sandbox using boost::packaged_task around a fresh sandbox instance of
our Lua interpreter wrapper object.  I'd be happy to hear suggestions
for alternate solutions.

   Ken