devenv: Disable apt sandboxing in nested containers

[cgwalters]

Add APT::Sandbox::User "root" configuration to prevent setgroups failures when running apt in nested user namespace environments.

This fixes apt package installation failures that occur when the container's user namespace mapping causes large UIDs/GIDs that exceed system limits.

Assisted-by: OpenCode (Sonnet 4.5)

[gemini-code-assist]

Summary of Changes

Hello @cgwalters, I'm Gemini Code Assist¹! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!

This pull request addresses critical APT package installation failures that arise in nested container environments. The issue stems from setgroups errors when user namespace mappings generate UIDs/GIDs that surpass system limits. The solution implemented is to disable APT's sandboxing feature within these specific container setups, ensuring reliable package management.

Highlights

• APT Sandboxing Disabled: Disabled APT sandboxing within the devenv/Containerfile.debian by adding the configuration APT::Sandbox::User "root";.
• Nested Container Fix: Resolved setgroups failures and APT package installation issues that occur in nested user namespace environments due to large UIDs/GIDs exceeding system limits.

🧠 New Feature in Public Preview: You can now enable Memory to help Gemini Code Assist learn from your team's feedback. This makes future code reviews more consistent and personalized to your project's style. Click here to enable Memory in your admin console.

Changelog

• devenv/Containerfile.debian
  • Added a configuration to disable APT sandboxing for nested container environments.

Using Gemini Code Assist

The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.

Invoking Gemini

You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands on the current page.

Feature	Command	Description
Code Review	/gemini review	Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state.
Pull Request Summary	/gemini summary	Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state.
Comment	@gemini-code-assist	Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in pull request comments and review comments.
Help	/gemini help	Displays a list of available commands.

Customization

To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.

Limitations & Feedback

Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here.

You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.

Footnotes

1. Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution. ↩

[gemini-code-assist]

Code Review

This pull request disables apt sandboxing in the Debian-based development container to resolve issues with setgroups failures in nested user namespace environments. However, a medium-severity vulnerability was identified: disabling the apt sandbox in the Debian Containerfile weakens the security of the image build process by allowing package installation scripts to run as root, increasing the risk from potentially compromised packages. While the change is correct and follows a standard approach for the problem, it is recommended to find an alternative solution that does not require disabling this security feature. Additionally, consider enhancing the code comment to provide more context for future maintainers.

[cgwalters]

Rolled into #103