Re: [Fink-devel] Are you running panther, and do you have no regard for your current Fink installation?
Benjamin Reed wrote: Then I need you! =) I just posted instructions to my blog on how to do some panther testing with Fink. If you're interested in helping out, please follow the instructions here: http://ranger.befunk.com/blog/archives/000246.html Oh, and make sure you don't use apt-get! Apt-get will give you reliable packages until we make a panther bindist. For now, panther users doing this testing must have the developer tools installed, and should do a 'fink install' for everything, rather than apt-get. -- Benjamin Reed a.k.a. Ranger Rick -- http://ranger.befunk.com/ gpg: 6401 D02A A35F 55E9 D7DD 71C5 52EF A366 D3F6 65FE xar! pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
[Fink-devel] freetype-1.3.1-6
I have been trying to install enlightenment and I continue to get an error message with freetype and freetype-hinting... ftdump.c:172:29: pasting . and glyph_object does not give a valid preprocessing token ftdump.c:182:31: pasting . and first_instance does not give a valid preprocessing token ftdump.c:191:32: pasting . and second_instance does not give a valid preprocessing token ftdump.c:201:62: pasting . and face_object does not give a valid preprocessing token ftdump.c:202:62: pasting . and glyph_object does not give a valid preprocessing token ftdump.c:203:62: pasting . and second_instance does not give a valid preprocessing token ftdump.c:863:33: pasting . and initial_overhead does not give a valid preprocessing token ftdump.c:882:28: pasting . and face_object does not give a valid preprocessing token make[1]: *** [ftdump.o] Error 1 make: *** [tttest] Error 2 ### execution of make failed, exit code 2 Failed: compiling freetype-hinting-1.3.1-7 failed -- Package manager version: 0.13.3 Distribution version: 0.5.3 Mac OS X version: 10.2.8 December 2002 Developer Tools or later gcc version: 3.3 make version: 3.79 Feedback Courtesy of FinkCommander --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: SF.net Giveback Program. SourceForge.net hosts over 70,000 Open Source Projects. See the people who have HELPED US provide better services: Click here: http://sourceforge.net/supporters.php ___ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
Re: [Fink-devel] freetype-1.3.1-6
Are you using gcc-3.3 to do this, as the sig says? I believe you have to build this with gcc-3.1. On Friday, October 10, 2003, at 12:11 PM, LINDSAY!!! wrote: I have been trying to install enlightenment and I continue to get an error message with freetype and freetype-hinting... ftdump.c:172:29: pasting . and glyph_object does not give a valid preprocessing token ftdump.c:182:31: pasting . and first_instance does not give a valid preprocessing token ftdump.c:191:32: pasting . and second_instance does not give a valid preprocessing token ftdump.c:201:62: pasting . and face_object does not give a valid preprocessing token ftdump.c:202:62: pasting . and glyph_object does not give a valid preprocessing token ftdump.c:203:62: pasting . and second_instance does not give a valid preprocessing token ftdump.c:863:33: pasting . and initial_overhead does not give a valid preprocessing token ftdump.c:882:28: pasting . and face_object does not give a valid preprocessing token make[1]: *** [ftdump.o] Error 1 make: *** [tttest] Error 2 ### execution of make failed, exit code 2 Failed: compiling freetype-hinting-1.3.1-7 failed -- Package manager version: 0.13.3 Distribution version: 0.5.3 Mac OS X version: 10.2.8 December 2002 Developer Tools or later gcc version: 3.3 make version: 3.79 Feedback Courtesy of FinkCommander --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: SF.net Giveback Program. SourceForge.net hosts over 70,000 Open Source Projects. See the people who have HELPED US provide better services: Click here: http://sourceforge.net/supporters.php ___ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
[Fink-devel] rsync updating and server subversion (svn) package
Chris Schaffner suggested that I post to this list my experience today updatiing my fink installation with fink 0.14 and rsync. The .info files for the server version of subversion, which I wanted to try installing, are missing from my /sw/fink/dists/unstable tree (I'd updated a week or two ago). So I asked Chris about it, and he said he'd recently uploaded the latest version. I haven't been able to update my fink installation for about a week (the CVS problem), so he suggested I tried the rsync update described in the archives. I did that, and it worked in lots of ways -- a lot of my installed packages got updated when I ran the update-all command afterwards -- but the .info files in the unstable tree seem to be still out of date -- even though the upper directories are date stamped today, the files in the crypto/finkinfo directory, for instance, are all dated June 21. Hope this helps, Lenny --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: SF.net Giveback Program. SourceForge.net hosts over 70,000 Open Source Projects. See the people who have HELPED US provide better services: Click here: http://sourceforge.net/supporters.php ___ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
[Fink-devel] Whereis doesn't work right with fink?
I installed the make package. I typed whereis and it came up with /usr/bin/make. It turns out that sysctl user.cs_path doesn't search /sw/bin and /sw/sbin. I'd change it but I can't figure out how to do it (according to the man pages user.cs_path isn't writable by sysctl). What's the fix? --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: SF.net Giveback Program. SourceForge.net hosts over 70,000 Open Source Projects. See the people who have HELPED US provide better services: Click here: http://sourceforge.net/supporters.php ___ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
[Fink-devel] fink run *not* as root
I've noticed that there are a few patches out there that disable fink's need to be root, but they all have drawbacks, like dpkg needs to be root. I've noticed that many of the developers have repeatedly dismissed it and have not even looked into if it would be easy to do. I went through the fink source... err, the perl stuff and I've made a patch that sets fink up to run as the current user, and also sets dpkg up to run as root when needed. I use the $method (from Engine.pm) variable so that its not dependant on sudo, but I wasn't sure if I should make it global or make it local in all the functions that need it. I made it local to the functions that need it. I hope that this can be looked at without the prejudice against it that I have seen from many developers towards pervious non-root patches. Also, my fink is set up to build in /tmp/fink instead of /sw/src and this is prob necessary for my non-root patch because the current user needs write privs and /sw/src isn't a good place to give world write privs. I'll look into seeing how to modify that dependancy. Perhaps a new default build dir? One last thing, this is diff'd against rangerRick's 0.14.0-rsync special version, although it uses none of his modifications. I can diff it against current cvs if this is too complex for some of you out there. :-) JP noRoot.patch Description: Binary data P.S. Feedback please?! :-D -- Every time you share on a P2P network, God kills a kitten. Please think of the kittens.
Re: [Fink-devel] rsync updating and server subversion (svn) package
Do you have unstable/crypto and unstable/main in the Trees line in /sw/etc/fink.conf ? The new rsync method only updates the trees which are mentioned in your conf file. -- Dave --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: SF.net Giveback Program. SourceForge.net hosts over 70,000 Open Source Projects. See the people who have HELPED US provide better services: Click here: http://sourceforge.net/supporters.php ___ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
Re: [Fink-devel] fink run *not* as root
John Davidorff Pell wrote: I've noticed that there are a few patches out there that disable fink's need to be root, but they all have drawbacks, like dpkg needs to be root. I've noticed that many of the developers have repeatedly dismissed it and have not even looked into if it would be easy to do. I went through the fink source... err, the perl stuff and I've made a patch that sets fink up to run as the current user, and also sets dpkg up to run as root when needed. I use the $method (from Engine.pm) variable so that its not dependant on sudo, but I wasn't sure if I should make it global or make it local in all the functions that need it. I made it local to the functions that need it. I think the biggest reason it never happened is that no one really championed making things happen, including all of the concerns in doing user-only building. There have been a few patches, but all of them ignore half of the equation, which is packages that either expect to, or have to run as root; sometimes at install time, sometimes at build time. There are packages that make suid files, there are packages that initialize things on installation, I'm sure there are other things that happen that we don't know about. There's no framework for gracefully handling those things as a regular user, and there's no suggestion on how to handle packaging policy on things that currently want/need root to install. Making fink the program handle it is the easy part, but all that's doing is telling users we support it even though a bunch of stuff will be broken. =) -- Benjamin Reed a.k.a. Ranger Rick -- http://ranger.befunk.com/ gpg: 6401 D02A A35F 55E9 D7DD 71C5 52EF A366 D3F6 65FE Just try to imagine a world where e-mails are sent by your brain before they are written, and are ready before they arrive by people you have never even met in countries you have never even heard of! pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [Fink-devel] Whereis doesn't work right with fink?
TM Lutas wrote: What's the fix? Simple: Don't use whereis. Use where (with tcsh) or type -a (with bash). -- Martin --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: SF.net Giveback Program. SourceForge.net hosts over 70,000 Open Source Projects. See the people who have HELPED US provide better services: Click here: http://sourceforge.net/supporters.php ___ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
Re: [Fink-devel] fink run *not* as root
On Friday, October 10, 2003, at 3:48 pm, David R. Morrison wrote: Sure, here's some feedback. First, let's examine where root is actually needed in fink. We certainly don't need to be root to run make on a package. Since fink directs make install to a temporary installation directory, we don't need to be root to run that either. The tricky thing, though, is the last thing fink does when compiling a package: it calls dpkg-deb to create the deb file out of the temporary installation directory. It is my belief that dpkg-deb insists on being run as root. If I'm right about that, this is the first change which would need to be made: dpkg-deb would need to be hacked so that it doesn't require root. (If I'm wrong, please let me know.) OK, but let's assume we solve that problem. Then we'd be able to run the command fink build foo without being root. That's probably a good thing, for a number of reasons. What about fink install foo though? Here we get into a problem of file permissions on /sw. Since fink is trying to assert total control over the /sw heierarchy, its probably best to leave that as owned by root. But then you'll need to be root to run fink install. (If you disagree, let me hear the arguments.) So anyway, as I see it, the missing first step here is a modification to dpkg which would allow dpkg-deb to run as an ordinary user. Just my 2 cents. -- Dave Problem solved already (it works, but maybe not solved), in my patch every time dpkg* is called, it is prefaced with sudo. Thus, to build the package root is not required, to make the deb/install the deb it is. So, no root until dpkg is called. Possible issue: package is build but you (for whatever reason) don't give dpkg (sudo actually) the passwd and it cancels. Now you have to rebuild. the dpkg line could be modified to create the deb in a tmp dir, then moved if given permission. You'll notice in my patch, I simply disable fink calling sudo at all (I disabled the root check) but it would prob be better to change the time at which it gets root. For example, make dpkg not be prefaced with sudo, but to restart fink as root at that point (meaning *after* the actual build/install to temp dir) :-D JP -- God is dead, now the war shall never end. --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: SF.net Giveback Program. SourceForge.net hosts over 70,000 Open Source Projects. See the people who have HELPED US provide better services: Click here: http://sourceforge.net/supporters.php ___ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
Re: [Fink-devel] fink run *not* as root
On Friday, October 10, 2003, at 06:48 PM, David R. Morrison wrote: Since fink directs make install to a temporary installation directory, we don't need to be root to run that either. Except when a package wants to chown a file. The tricky thing, though, is the last thing fink does when compiling a package: it calls dpkg-deb to create the deb file out of the temporary installation directory. It is my belief that dpkg-deb insists on being run as root. If I'm right about that, this is the first change which would need to be made: dpkg-deb would need to be hacked so that it doesn't require root. Also, if you run dpkg-deb on a install directory (%i) containing non-root-owned files, the installed package will include those files as non-root. It's not a good thing if other users can modify files in /sw . dpkg would have to be hacked to install non-root files as root when desired. OK, but let's assume we solve that problem. Then we'd be able to run the command fink build foo without being root. That's probably a good thing, for a number of reasons. What about fink install foo though? Here we get into a problem of file permissions on /sw. Since fink is trying to assert total control over the /sw heierarchy, its probably best to leave that as owned by root. But then you'll need to be root to run fink install. (If you disagree, let me hear the arguments.) One of the solutions to this problem, as well as the above problem re: non-root-owned files in .debs, is to simply install in another prefix and make it entirely user owned. That probably has its own problems. Not to sound too negative, I actually would love to see user-mode fink, I even did some hacking on fakeroot once upon a time. It's just that it's a big job, and nobody's wanted to take it further than works for me. Dave --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: SF.net Giveback Program. SourceForge.net hosts over 70,000 Open Source Projects. See the people who have HELPED US provide better services: Click here: http://sourceforge.net/supporters.php ___ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
Re: [Fink-devel] fink run *not* as root
On Friday, October 10, 2003, at 3:54 pm, Benjamin Reed wrote: John Davidorff Pell wrote: I've noticed that there are a few patches out there that disable fink's need to be root, but they all have drawbacks, like dpkg needs to be root. I've noticed that many of the developers have repeatedly dismissed it and have not even looked into if it would be easy to do. I went through the fink source... err, the perl stuff and I've made a patch that sets fink up to run as the current user, and also sets dpkg up to run as root when needed. I use the $method (from Engine.pm) variable so that its not dependant on sudo, but I wasn't sure if I should make it global or make it local in all the functions that need it. I made it local to the functions that need it. I think the biggest reason it never happened is that no one really championed making things happen, including all of the concerns in doing user-only building. There have been a few patches, but all of them ignore half of the equation, which is packages that either expect to, or have to run as root; sometimes at install time, sometimes at build time. There are packages that make suid files, there are packages that initialize things on installation, I'm sure there are other things that happen that we don't know about. There's no framework for gracefully handling those things as a regular user, and there's no suggestion on how to handle packaging policy on things that currently want/need root to install. Making fink the program handle it is the easy part, but all that's doing is telling users we support it even though a bunch of stuff will be broken. =) IMHO there should be *no* package that makes *anything* SUID root that I (the user) don't know about, thus those packages that require something like that should be modified on a per-package basis (for these packages something like 'sudo make...' would work fine). Also, nothing should be initialised when fink does 'make install PREFIX=...' because I'm *not* installing the package. This method would allow package maintainers to find bugs like these which are otherwise very difficult to find. It will also prevent a package from installing out of the PREFIX'd build dir. :-) JP It's all fun and games 'til someone writes to a NULL pointer! --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: SF.net Giveback Program. SourceForge.net hosts over 70,000 Open Source Projects. See the people who have HELPED US provide better services: Click here: http://sourceforge.net/supporters.php ___ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
Re: [Fink-devel] fink run *not* as root
On Fri, Oct 10, 2003 at 06:48:13PM -0400, David R. Morrison wrote: OK, but let's assume we solve that problem. Then we'd be able to run the command fink build foo without being root. That's probably a good thing, for a number of reasons. What about fink install foo though? Here we get into a problem of file permissions on /sw. Since fink is trying to assert total control over the /sw heierarchy, its probably best to leave that as owned by root. But then you'll need to be root to run fink install. (If you disagree, let me hear the arguments.) There could be three options (in my preferred order): 1) sudo to some other user (i.e. fink) 2) install as the current user. 3) sudo to root 1) Seems to me to be the best overall solution, since the user isn't going to be able to clobber any non-fink files. 2) Is kind of risky, since the user would be able to clobber anything in /sw without using sudo, but then no system files could be clobbered. 3) Is where we are right now, and has the potential to clobber system files. -- GPG public key: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0x9D5B8762 --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: SF.net Giveback Program. SourceForge.net hosts over 70,000 Open Source Projects. See the people who have HELPED US provide better services: Click here: http://sourceforge.net/supporters.php ___ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
Re: [Fink-devel] fink run *not* as root
On Fri, Oct 10, 2003 at 06:54:28PM -0400, Benjamin Reed wrote: There are packages that make suid files, there are packages that initialize things on installation, I'm sure there are other things that happen that we don't know about. There's no framework for gracefully handling those things as a regular user, and there's no suggestion on how to handle packaging policy on things that currently want/need root to install. All the more reason to check it out, to weed out other things that happen that we don't know about ;) -- GPG public key: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0x9D5B8762 --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: SF.net Giveback Program. SourceForge.net hosts over 70,000 Open Source Projects. See the people who have HELPED US provide better services: Click here: http://sourceforge.net/supporters.php ___ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
Re: [Fink-devel] fink run *not* as root
On Friday, October 10, 2003, at 4:10 pm, Dave Vasilevsky wrote: On Friday, October 10, 2003, at 06:48 PM, David R. Morrison wrote: Since fink directs make install to a temporary installation directory, we don't need to be root to run that either. Except when a package wants to chown a file. The chown should be to root, except in the few packages that have their own user, right? The tricky thing, though, is the last thing fink does when compiling a package: it calls dpkg-deb to create the deb file out of the temporary installation directory. It is my belief that dpkg-deb insists on being run as root. If I'm right about that, this is the first change which would need to be made: dpkg-deb would need to be hacked so that it doesn't require root. Also, if you run dpkg-deb on a install directory (%i) containing non-root-owned files, the installed package will include those files as non-root. It's not a good thing if other users can modify files in /sw . dpkg would have to be hacked to install non-root files as root when desired. So if I changed sudo dpkg* to sudo chown -R root:admin . sudo dpkg* that would fix it, right? In the packages that have their own user, something slightly more complicated would have to be devised, perhaps just a PostInst script. Maybe after every fink install, fink should 'sudo chown -R root:admin /sw' anyway? OK, but let's assume we solve that problem. Then we'd be able to run the command fink build foo without being root. That's probably a good thing, for a number of reasons. What about fink install foo though? Here we get into a problem of file permissions on /sw. Since fink is trying to assert total control over the /sw heierarchy, its probably best to leave that as owned by root. But then you'll need to be root to run fink install. (If you disagree, let me hear the arguments.) One of the solutions to this problem, as well as the above problem re: non-root-owned files in .debs, is to simply install in another prefix and make it entirely user owned. That probably has its own problems. Create a 'fink' user? That would solve... all the problems? Let's do it! 'sudo -u fink' in place of 'sudo' should negate the need for any other patch to fink at all. Not to sound too negative, I actually would love to see user-mode fink, I even did some hacking on fakeroot once upon a time. It's just that it's a big job, and nobody's wanted to take it further than works for me. Dave It worx for me, but I want it to work for real. :-) ! JP -- Blood is thicker than water... and much tastier. --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: SF.net Giveback Program. SourceForge.net hosts over 70,000 Open Source Projects. See the people who have HELPED US provide better services: Click here: http://sourceforge.net/supporters.php ___ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
Re: [Fink-devel] fink run *not* as root
I have to disagree about the timing of when root is supposed to be invoked. I issue a command to build a package which will take an hour... I come back two hours later, only to find that it's been waiting for the past hour for me to enter my password? Not a good user experience. That's why Fink decides at the beginning of its run whether it needs to be root or not. If we're going to decide at the beginning, then even fink build foo cannot be run as non-root. (See my previous message). -- Dave --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: SF.net Giveback Program. SourceForge.net hosts over 70,000 Open Source Projects. See the people who have HELPED US provide better services: Click here: http://sourceforge.net/supporters.php ___ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
Re: [Fink-devel] fink run *not* as root
Suppose fink packages optionally use fields 'BuildRequiresRoot' or 'InstallRequiresRoot'? Then fink could choose to require running as root, and inform the user at the start when building / installing a package requires root privs. (Depend checks would determine whether any depends require root for some stage.) And if fink was originally installed as root then all packages require root privs for install. --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: SF.net Giveback Program. SourceForge.net hosts over 70,000 Open Source Projects. See the people who have HELPED US provide better services: Click here: http://sourceforge.net/supporters.php ___ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
Re: [Fink-devel] fink run *not* as root
NetBSD, for example, becomes root at the install phase, requesting a password at that time, and can be rigged to use su or sudo. So this is not unheard-of in package managers (and can be very convenient). --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: SF.net Giveback Program. SourceForge.net hosts over 70,000 Open Source Projects. See the people who have HELPED US provide better services: Click here: http://sourceforge.net/supporters.php ___ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
[Fink-devel] Dpkg...
I've got fink 100% working with the 'fink' user, UID 240, created
manually, except one minor part...
dpkg -i
/test/fink/dists/local/bootstrap/binary-darwin-powerpc/
fink_0.14.0.cvs-20031010.2353_darwin-powerpc.deb
dpkg: requested operation requires superuser privilege
### execution of dpkg failed, exit code 2
arg. 'sudo dpkg' works, but again it would ask for a passwd if the
compile lasted more than 5 mins... A line can be added to /etc/sudoers
that would allow a certain user ('fink' in this case) to run sudo w/o a
passwd, but that prob won't float with many people. Aren't there ways
of simply extracting the files within a deb? Then we could parse the
pre/post scripts ourselves... anyone up for a dpkg replacement? ;-)
Issue: sudo when exec'd after a previous 'sudo -u fink' ask's for the
'fink' user's passwd... that's bad. Plus, 'fink' isn't in admin, so
sudo won't work at all... 'su'?
Here's an idea: Make a duplicate dpkg binary, readable *only* by the
'fink' user, and make it SUID root. Ok? Not ok? prob not...
Feedback?
JP
--
God is dead, now the war shall never end.
---
This SF.net email is sponsored by: SF.net Giveback Program.
SourceForge.net hosts over 70,000 Open Source Projects.
See the people who have HELPED US provide better services:
Click here: http://sourceforge.net/supporters.php
___
Fink-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
Re: [Fink-devel] Some issues trying to compile qcad-2.0.0.8
Thanks guys, I managed to comment out the lines previously mentioned, and it compiled OK. I just have to figure out what files to install now! (No install script... :( ) On 07/10/2003, at 9:22 PM, kinako wrote: Hi, On 2003.10.7, at 20:12 Asia/Tokyo, Benjamin Reed wrote: Do you have Qt/Mac installed somewhere (like, /usr/local?). I can't think of any reason our Qt would be looking for that header unless it was finding Qt/Mac somewhere. It is main.cpp in qcad that calls qmacstyle_mac.h. kinako at mac.com --- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf ___ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: SF.net Giveback Program. SourceForge.net hosts over 70,000 Open Source Projects. See the people who have HELPED US provide better services: Click here: http://sourceforge.net/supporters.php ___ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
[Fink-devel] emacs21-nox build problem (10.2-gcc3.3)
I suppose 'fink install emacs21-nox' failed during functional test...? A log of the install attempt is posted at http://www.stochastic.net/~kaben/for_fink/ --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: SF.net Giveback Program. SourceForge.net hosts over 70,000 Open Source Projects. See the people who have HELPED US provide better services: Click here: http://sourceforge.net/supporters.php ___ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
Re: [Fink-devel] fink run *not* as root
On Oct 10, 2003, at 6:48 PM, David R. Morrison wrote: Sure, here's some feedback. First, let's examine where root is actually needed in fink. We certainly don't need to be root to run make on a package. Since fink directs make install to a temporary installation directory, we don't need to be root to run that either. The tricky thing, though, is the last thing fink does when compiling a package: it calls dpkg-deb to create the deb file out of the temporary installation directory. It is my belief that dpkg-deb insists on being run as root. If I'm right about that, this is the first change which would need to be made: dpkg-deb would need to be hacked so that it doesn't require root. (If I'm wrong, please let me know.) There is a --force-not-root option to dpkg; I'm not sure about dpkg-deb. All I know is that I've used the user patch that's already on our patch tracker successfully on lamancha.opendarwin.org until a selfupdate wiped it out. --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: SF.net Giveback Program. SourceForge.net hosts over 70,000 Open Source Projects. See the people who have HELPED US provide better services: Click here: http://sourceforge.net/supporters.php ___ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
