On Sun, Oct 29, 2006, martin f krafft wrote:
First, I would use a case statement instead of echo | grep.
Right.
Second, how about:
local UMOUNT_OUTPUT
if UMOUNT_OUTPUT=$(LC_ALL=C umount $BUILDPLACE/$1); then
# it worked
else
# it did not
fi
Ah, thanks! For some reason, this
also sprach Junichi Uekawa [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006.10.09.0702 +0200]:
diamond:~ PID=14692
#[130,303]
diamond:~ grep -q pbuilder/build/$PID/proc /proc/mounts echo /proc is
mounted under pbuilder chroot $PID
Hi,
I don't think pbuilder should really care about user errors. Shooting
your foot, that's fine. You can even remount /proc to recover from
this state.
How does umounting /proc mean shooting myself in the foot? How is it
an error?
The check wasn't added for no reason.
It is
also sprach Junichi Uekawa [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006.10.08.1204 +0200]:
It is difficult to distinguish between not being able to umount /proc,
and /proc not being mounted in the first place, and the bet is done on
the safe side of things, since after all those checks have passed,
we're going to
Hi,
It is difficult to distinguish between not being able to umount /proc,
and /proc not being mounted in the first place, and the bet is done on
the safe side of things, since after all those checks have passed,
we're going to 'rm -rf' the whole tree, and it is possible for a
mounted
also sprach Junichi Uekawa [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006.10.06.1506 +0200]:
I don't think pbuilder should really care about user errors. Shooting
your foot, that's fine. You can even remount /proc to recover from
this state.
How does umounting /proc mean shooting myself in the foot? How is it
an
Hi,
For testing purposes, I had previously umounted /proc already.
I don't think pbuilder should try to umount it if it's not mounted.
Hmm...
I don't think pbuilder should really care about user errors. Shooting
your foot, that's fine. You can even remount /proc to recover from
this state.
7 matches
Mail list logo
