On Wed, 24 Aug 2005 06:15:08 +1000, Paul TBBle Hampson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
said:
> On Tue, Aug 23, 2005 at 01:52:22PM -0300, Humberto Massa Guimarães wrote:
>> ** Bastian Blank ::
>>> You have a linux kernel ready, which allows chroot as normal user?
>>> Please share it with us.
>> It's called
Roger Leigh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The chroot is not really suitable for anything but exclusive use by
> sbuild (otherwise you risk messing it up by installing random stuff
> so that it's no better than the host environment...).
>
> You could always use a separate chroot for user access, bu
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Goswin von Brederlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Roger Leigh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I often do "debuild -us -uc -nc" outside the chroot till i get the
> package to build and then build just source and dump it into the local
> buildd to confi
Bastian Blank <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tue, Aug 23, 2005 at 05:04:57PM +0100, Roger Leigh wrote:
>> Not a kernel feature, but see
>> http://packages.debian.org/unstable/admin/schroot
>
> Does not help, each chroot needs to be setup by root and you need root
> priviledges to install packa
Roger Leigh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "Joe Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> Actually perhaps software should be built outside of clean
>> chroots. Why? Because if there is a possibility that a dirty chroot
>> will cause the package to fail, there is a bug in some peice of
>> software.
"Roberto C. Sanchez" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tue, Aug 23, 2005 at 12:40:18AM -0400, Joe Smith wrote:
>> Actually perhaps software should be built outside of clean chroots. Why?
>> Because if there is a possibility that a dirty chroot will cause the package
>> to
>> fail, there is a bug
Nathanael Nerode <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Sven Luther wrote:
>> All packages should be built by official debian buildds anyway, not on
>> developper machines with random cruft and unsecure packages installed, or
> even
>> possibly experimental or home-modified stuff.
>
> Actually, it's bette
On Tue, Aug 23, 2005 at 01:52:22PM -0300, Humberto Massa Guimarães wrote:
> ** Bastian Blank ::
>> You have a linux kernel ready, which allows chroot as normal user?
>> Please share it with us.
> It's called QEMU :-)
Or pbuilder-uml, once someone gets onto the user-mode-linunx package
(and kernel
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Bastian Blank <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tue, Aug 23, 2005 at 05:04:57PM +0100, Roger Leigh wrote:
>> Not a kernel feature, but see
>> http://packages.debian.org/unstable/admin/schroot
>
> Does not help, each chroot needs to be setup by root a
On Tue, Aug 23, 2005 at 05:04:57PM +0100, Roger Leigh wrote:
> Not a kernel feature, but see
> http://packages.debian.org/unstable/admin/schroot
Does not help, each chroot needs to be setup by root and you need root
priviledges to install packages in it.
Bastian
--
Madness has no purpose. Or
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
"Joe Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Actually perhaps software should be built outside of clean
> chroots. Why? Because if there is a possibility that a dirty chroot
> will cause the package to fail, there is a bug in some peice of
> software. I
On Tue, Aug 23, 2005 at 07:26:25PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 23, 2005 at 06:01:24PM +0200, Piotr Roszatycki wrote:
> > Use fakechroot. Yes, it is ugly hack, but it allows me to recompile the
^^^
> > packages without root privileges.
>
> We all use fakeroot. The quest
On Tue, Aug 23, 2005 at 06:01:24PM +0200, Piotr Roszatycki wrote:
> On Tuesday 23 of August 2005 17:28, Bastian Blank wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 23, 2005 at 12:06:41PM -0300, Humberto Massa Guimarães wrote:
> > > I vehemently disagree. I think exactly the opposite: debbuild and/or
> > > dpkg-buildpacka
** Bastian Blank ::
> You have a linux kernel ready, which allows chroot as normal user?
> Please share it with us.
It's called QEMU :-)
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tuesday 23 of August 2005 17:28, Bastian Blank wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 23, 2005 at 12:06:41PM -0300, Humberto Massa Guimarães wrote:
> > I vehemently disagree. I think exactly the opposite: debbuild and/or
> > dpkg-buildpackage should *always* build a package inside a clean and
> > minimal chroot j
On Tue, Aug 23, 2005 at 05:28:22PM +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 23, 2005 at 12:06:41PM -0300, Humberto Massa Guimarães wrote:
> > I vehemently disagree. I think exactly the opposite: debbuild and/or
> > dpkg-buildpackage should *always* build a package inside a clean and
> > minimal ch
On Tue, Aug 23, 2005 at 12:06:41PM -0300, Humberto Massa Guimarães wrote:
> I vehemently disagree. I think exactly the opposite: debbuild and/or
> dpkg-buildpackage should *always* build a package inside a clean and
> minimal chroot jail. This way, (1) every package will predictably
> build from (u
** Joe Smith ::
> Actually perhaps software should be built outside of clean chroots. Why?
> Because if there is a possibility that a dirty chroot will cause the package
> to fail, there is a bug in some peice of software. It could prevent a user
> from recompiling on his own system, which thusly
On Tue, Aug 23, 2005 at 12:40:18AM -0400, Joe Smith wrote:
> Actually perhaps software should be built outside of clean chroots. Why?
Do I need to have root on the debian developer machines? I currently use
that machines to build packages for architectures I don't own.
Bastian
--
The best dipl
Joe Smith writes:
> Actually perhaps software should be built outside of clean chroots. Why?
> Because if there is a possibility that a dirty chroot will cause the
> package to fail, there is a bug in some peice of software.
The probability that the developer has the particular package that will
c
On 8/23/05, Joe Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Actually perhaps software should be built outside of clean chroots. Why?
Did someone suggest to disallow that?
Why can't you do both?
On Tue, Aug 23, 2005 at 12:40:18AM -0400, Joe Smith wrote:
> Actually perhaps software should be built outside of clean chroots. Why?
> Because if there is a possibility that a dirty chroot will cause the package
> to
> fail, there is a bug in some peice of software. It could prevent a user from
Actually perhaps software should be built outside of clean chroots. Why?
Because if there is a possibility that a dirty chroot will cause the package
to fail, there is a bug in some peice of software. It could prevent a user
from recompiling on his own system, which thusly defeats the point of h
Sven Luther wrote:
> All packages should be built by official debian buildds anyway, not on
> developper machines with random cruft and unsecure packages installed, or
even
> possibly experimental or home-modified stuff.
Actually, it's better yet if the packages are built on developer machines
i
24 matches
Mail list logo
