On Saturday 27 August 2011 00:56:08 Denys Vlasenko wrote: > On Thursday 25 August 2011 20:49, Tom Gundersen wrote: > > Hi guys, > > > > Since commit 4a2a86d5e7e7bf284a31af604a738dfa1f1a2240 (improve > > --install operation in chroot jail) I have had some problems. I see > > that the patch is meant to help when exec_path is /proc/self/exec, but > > it is causing problems for me when I use exec_path=/bin/busybox. > > > > My usecase (somewhat simplified) is the following: > > > > busybox is installed in /lib/busybox/busybox and not in /bin/busybox > > > > cp /lib/busybox/busybox /mnt/bin/busybox > > /lib/busybox/busybox -s --install /mnt/bin > > chroot /mnt /bin/sh > > > > Before the aforementioned commit this worked fine, but now /mnt/bin/sh > > points to /lib/busybox/busybox. > > > > Any chance the commit could be reverted, or changed to only apply to > > the case when exec_path is /proc/self/exec? > > I am leaning towards ripping out --install altogether, > and telling users that they should use something like > > for applet in `busybox --list`; do > ln -s busybox /mnt/bin/$applet > done > > instead. > >
Hi, --install works fine, you just must use it the proper way without pretending it to guess what your intentions are. It is there to install in a live system (through the /proc/self/exe mode) or in a chroot (through the absolute path in argv[0]), maybe it needs to be better documented. In busybox --install [-s] [DIR] the dir arg is not intended to be the future root it is just if you want to install busybox to a custom dir e.g. xbin. Ciao, Tito _______________________________________________ busybox mailing list [email protected] http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/busybox
