Please, no. mount() failures are already hard to reason about, I wouldrather not add another temporary (or worse, permanent) non-obviousfailure mode.What if we make shifted bind mounts always readonly? That will forcepeople to use an overlay (or something else) on top, but they probablywant to do that anyway so they can avoid tainting the originalcontainer image with writes.It's not just the cool factor: if you're doing this, it's presumablybecause you want to use it with a container in a user namespace.Specifying the same parameters twice leaves room for error, causingCVEs and more work.Tycho_______________________________________________Containers mailing list