Proxmox 9.1.5 breaks LXC mount points?

[Johannes S]

Maybe I missed something but did this bug even hit the enterprise repo?

 

[leesteken]

did this bug even hit the enterprise repo?

No, it did not. It does make me worry about the coverage of Proxmox's automated test set on containers though.

 

[Johannes S]

No, it did not.

Then I don't get, why this issue shows " that such things will really keep proxmox far from "production ready" ( from this thread) unless it is stated somewhere". It's clearly stated at each login that one shouldn't use no-sub in production. So in my book the release process works as designed

It does make me worry about the coverage of Proxmox's automated test set on containers though.

Valid point, I agree. Maybe a staff member can comment on that?

 

[hnguk]

Then I don't get, why this issue shows " that such things will really keep proxmox far from "production ready" ( from this thread) unless it is stated somewhere". It's clearly stated at each login that one shouldn't use no-sub in production. So in my book the release process works as designed


Valid point, I agree. Maybe a staff member can comment on that?

Isn't the point of the test & non-subscription repos that bugs can happen and thus us reporting them and it getting fixed is part of the process? I would go to enterprise branch but for my homelab purposes I'm not sure if even the community subscription is worth it especially since I have 4 mini pcs running Proxmox.

 

[Johannes S]

Isn't the point of the test & non-subscription repos that bugs can happen and thus us reporting them and it getting fixed is part of the process?

This was exactly my point I wanted to make since somebody in this thread argued that things like the current isse might led to companies considering PVE not "production-ready" for enterprise environments. And this is nonsense: In an enterprise environment the company will also purchase the needed subscription so wouldn't get hit by this (or simmiliar) issues, detected by the beta-testers aka users of no-subscription repo.

I would go to enterprise branch but for my homelab purposes I'm not sure if even the community subscription is worth it especially since I have 4 mini pcs running Proxmox.

Well obviouvsly a homelab would also profit from the greater stability of the enterprise-repositorys and you would get rid of the nag screen. Whether you are willing to pay the needed sum for it, is another story though. Personally I can't afford it and I can live with being a beta tester which might get hit by a bug from time to time.

 

[Juc]

I saw that version 6.1.1 of the container management tool is released. Does anyone know if it fixes the issue?

 

[wowo]

I saw that version 6.1.1 of the container management tool is released. Does anyone know if it fixes the issue?

I installed 6.1.1. I am able to start a container with NFS shares now. The container failed to start with the bugged version.
I am getting a warning when starting the container, but it seems to work. The shares are available:

WARN: Systemd 257 detected. You may need to enable nesting.
TASK WARNINGS: 1

 

[hnguk]

I saw that version 6.1.1 of the container management tool is released. Does anyone know if it fixes the issue?

The changelog being below, but specifically fix #7271 is the fix for this issue. Updated pve-container to 6.1.1, stopped a container with a bind mount and started it again. No issues so far.

pve-container (6.1.1) trixie; urgency=medium

  * setup: plugin interface: add missing check_systemd_nesting stub.

  * fix #7270: setup: add no-op check_systemd_nesting implementation for
    unmanaged containers.

  * setup: add no-op detect_architecture for unmanaged CTs.

  * fix #7271: exclude non-volume mount points, like e.g. bind mounts, from
    attribute preservation.

 -- Proxmox Support Team <support@proxmox.com>  Fri, 06 Feb 2026 15:40:44 +0100