ash
> Init: systemd (via /run/systemd/system)
> LSM: AppArmor: enabled
>
> Run the command:
> fakeroot fakechroot debootstrap --verbose --variant=fakechroot
> buster ${WORKSPACE}/buster
>
> Ends up with a lot of warnings
> dpkg: warning: ignoring pre-dependency
the command:
fakeroot fakechroot debootstrap --verbose --variant=fakechroot
buster ${WORKSPACE}/buster
Ends up with a lot of warnings
dpkg: warning: ignoring pre-dependency problem!
And fails finally with a lot of errors with this pattern
On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 08:53:14AM +0200, Eugene Zhukov wrote:
> Hi Osamu,
>
> On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 5:35 PM, Osamu Aoki wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 02:10:57PM +0200, Eugene Zhukov wrote:
> >> Hello,
> >>
> >> I came across this building tutor
Hi Osamu,
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 5:35 PM, Osamu Aoki wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 02:10:57PM +0200, Eugene Zhukov wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> I came across this building tutorial [1]. It advertises using
>> fakeroot debian/rules binary
>> command to build a pa
On 2/18/15, Osamu Aoki wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 02:10:57PM +0200, Eugene Zhukov wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> I came across this building tutorial [1]. It advertises using
>> fakeroot debian/rules binary
>> command to build a package. Needless to say it doesn
On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 02:10:57PM +0200, Eugene Zhukov wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I came across this building tutorial [1]. It advertises using
> fakeroot debian/rules binary
> command to build a package. Needless to say it doesn't work for all packages.
> I find this tutorial c
tools and ways to do the same thing. Still don't know all
the details.
--
Peter
On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 1:10 PM, Eugene Zhukov wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I came across this building tutorial [1]. It advertises using
> fakeroot debian/rules binary
> command to build a package. Needle
Hello,
I came across this building tutorial [1]. It advertises using
fakeroot debian/rules binary
command to build a package. Needless to say it doesn't work for all packages.
I find this tutorial confusing. I know of two other IMHO better pages
on the topic [2] and [3].
Did I miss somethi
On 19/03/2012 15:13, Camaleón wrote:
On Mon, 19 Mar 2012 15:01:12 +0100, Nicolas Bercher wrote:
On a Squeeze, I'm trying debootstrap with variant fakeroot:
$ sudo debootstrap --arch=amd64 --variant=fakeroot squeeze
debootstrap-squeeze-amd64
E: unsupported variant
(...)
By re
On Mon, 19 Mar 2012 15:01:12 +0100, Nicolas Bercher wrote:
> On a Squeeze, I'm trying debootstrap with variant fakeroot:
>
>$ sudo debootstrap --arch=amd64 --variant=fakeroot squeeze
> debootstrap-squeeze-amd64
>E: unsupported variant
(...)
By reading the ma
On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 10:01 AM, Nicolas Bercher wrote:
>
> On a Squeeze, I'm trying debootstrap with variant fakeroot:
>
> $ sudo debootstrap --arch=amd64 --variant=fakeroot squeeze
> debootstrap-squeeze-amd64
> E: unsupported variant
>
> This is exactly bug 3191
On a Squeeze, I'm trying debootstrap with variant fakeroot:
$ sudo debootstrap --arch=amd64 --variant=fakeroot squeeze
debootstrap-squeeze-amd64
E: unsupported variant
This is exactly bug 319100[1] (2005), which is tagged as "fixed":
- the error is the same,
- the
Mark Grieveson wrote:
The Debian package has been created in the current directory. You can
install the package as root (e.g. dpkg -i
sun-j2sdk1.5_1.5.0+update08_i386.deb).
Removing temporary directory: done
So, after
The Debian package has been created in the current directory. You can
install the package as root (e.g. dpkg -i
sun-j2sdk1.5_1.5.0+update08_i386.deb).
Removing temporary directory: done
So, after the last step, if my de
To install the Java from Sun, I was following the steps given here:
http://www.debianhelp.co.uk/debianjava.htm
When I do the fakeroot command to make the deb package out of the java
bin file I had previously downloaded, I get this kind of output
/ I
fixed i2c to do this today; I'll probably get to uploading a version
of lm-sensors on Monday that also plays nicely with this. A wishlist
bug on lm-sensors-source wouldn't be unreasonable, but it's on my list
for the weekend already. :-) You'll probably need to do an expli
On Sat, Nov 09, 2002 at 07:00:12PM -0800, Ross Boylan wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 09, 2002 at 09:52:21PM -0500, David Z Maze wrote:
> > Ross Boylan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > I just inadvertently built a kernel without fakeroot, specifically I
> > > s
On Sat, Nov 09, 2002 at 09:52:21PM -0500, David Z Maze wrote:
> Ross Boylan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > I just inadvertently built a kernel without fakeroot, specifically I
> > said
> > make-kpkg --append-to-version advncdfs --config xconfig kernel_image
Ross Boylan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I just inadvertently built a kernel without fakeroot, specifically I
> said
> make-kpkg --append-to-version advncdfs --config xconfig kernel_image
>
> I don't see any error messages, and the deb was built.
>
> My k
Ross Boylan wrote:
I just inadvertently built a kernel without fakeroot, specifically I
said
make-kpkg --append-to-version advncdfs --config xconfig kernel_image
I don't see any error messages, and the deb was built.
My kernel-pkg.conf includes the line
root_cmd := fakeroot
though I don&#
I just inadvertently built a kernel without fakeroot, specifically I
said
make-kpkg --append-to-version advncdfs --config xconfig kernel_image
I don't see any error messages, and the deb was built.
My kernel-pkg.conf includes the line
root_cmd := fakeroot
though I don't find "fak
On Sun, Jun 09, 2002 at 05:31:51PM -0500, JW wrote:
> I'm not the least bit supprised that lilo fails (in fact I'm rather glad it
> fails :-D ), because lilo can't -- and shouldn't -- be run from the chroot
> environment.
>
> The question then is why is lilo being tweaked at all -- I haven't t
On Sunday 09 June 2002 03:02 pm, martin f krafft wrote:
> also sprach JW <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002.06.09.2155 +0200]:
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ apt-get install python2.2
>
> try:
>
> fakeroot apt-get install python2.2
Thanks, that works great with a little PATH modi
Sean Perry wrote:
> On 09-Apr-2002 Theo Bierman wrote:
> > Hi All
> >
> > I am trying to build a .deb package using fakeroot from any *.tgz
file. And I
> > kepe on getting :
> >
> > fakeroot debian/rules binary
> > dh_testdir
> > make: dh_tes
On 09-Apr-2002 Theo Bierman wrote:
> Hi All
>
> I am trying to build a .deb package using fakeroot from any *.tgz file. And I
> kepe on getting :
>
> fakeroot debian/rules binary
> dh_testdir
> make: dh_testdir: Command not found
> make: *** [thread-stamp] Error 127
Hi All
I am trying to build a .deb package using fakeroot from any *.tgz file. And I
kepe on getting :
fakeroot debian/rules binary
dh_testdir
make: dh_testdir: Command not found
make: *** [thread-stamp] Error 127
Any ideas
--
Theo Bierman
Customer Implementation Team
UUNET S.A., a WorldCom
On Mon, Oct 15, 2001 at 11:05:20PM -0700, Brian Lavender wrote:
> How do you do a fakeroot when you build a package from source?
>
> $debian/rules binary
$fakeroot debian/rules binary
--
Harry Henry Gebel
West Dover Hundred, Delaware
GPG encrypted email gladly accepted. Key ID:
How do you do a fakeroot when you build a package from source?
$debian/rules binary
brian
On Thu, Jun 28, 2001 at 10:03:15PM -0500, will trillich wrote:
...
> --
> DEBIAN NEWBIE TIP #56 from Vineet Kumar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> :
> Troubled by DOS-FORMAT OR MAC-FORMAT TEXT FILES? Here's another
> way to deal with those troublesome ^M characters: a simple
> tr -d '\015' < dos.file
On Thu, Jun 28, 2001 at 02:22:44PM -0400, Alan Shutko wrote:
> will trillich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > * by the way -- speaking of filtering 'randomized' signatures
> > based on message content, is there any way to have mutt pipe a
> > quoted reply-to message through a script before sendin
will trillich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> * by the way -- speaking of filtering 'randomized' signatures
> based on message content, is there any way to have mutt pipe a
> quoted reply-to message through a script before sending it to the
> editor?
There may be a specific way, but you could alway
On Wed, Jun 27, 2001 at 11:05:51PM +0200, Carel Fellinger wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 27, 2001 at 01:34:19PM -0500, will trillich wrote:
> ...
> > hmm. maybe there's a scoring mechanism, coupled with a macro,
> > that you could cobble together to have mutt work that way?
>
> hoped for someone to have don
On Wed, Jun 27, 2001 at 01:34:19PM -0500, will trillich wrote:
...
> hmm. maybe there's a scoring mechanism, coupled with a macro,
> that you could cobble together to have mutt work that way?
hoped for someone to have done it for me:)
> mutt's awful paarful, don' be dissin' my main mua!
...
> --
On Mon, Jun 25, 2001 at 12:23:19AM +0200, Carel Fellinger wrote:
> O how I mis tin's capability to hide/unhide read messages.
> Under mutt I simply delete read messages instead of having them fade
> away. <\rambling>
hmm. maybe there's a scoring mechanism, coupled with a macro,
that you could cob
On Sat, Jun 23, 2001 at 03:03:35PM -0800, Ethan Benson wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 23, 2001 at 11:35:05PM +0200, Carel Fellinger wrote:
> >
> > Don't know why debians package builder needs to be root, but given that
> > it suffices to fake root, fakeroot is the way to go:)
>
On Sat, Jun 23, 2001 at 06:04:01PM +0200, Joost Kooij wrote:
| need root priviledges even for that. But then there's still lilo that
| wants to write to random places on your disk. That is where the security
Random places? Sounds dangerous .
| aspect of it forces you to really be root. Or tra
On Sat, Jun 23, 2001 at 11:35:05PM +0200, Carel Fellinger wrote:
>
> Don't know why debians package builder needs to be root, but given that
> it suffices to fake root, fakeroot is the way to go:)
because if your not {fake}root all files in that package will end up
getting install
On Sat, Jun 23, 2001 at 06:04:01PM +0200, Joost Kooij wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 23, 2001 at 10:59:47AM -0500, Ken Januski wrote:
> > Let me rephrase the question. I've never used fakeroot or sudo but
> > realize that they allow root privileges without being root. What I'm
>
On Sat, Jun 23, 2001 at 10:08:26AM -0600, ray p wrote:
> IMO and many will tell me I'm wrong. tools like sudo and fakeroot make sense
> on a large system where you have to give more than one person root rights for
> some things but do not want to give them this power for ev
IMO and many will tell me I'm wrong. tools like sudo and fakeroot make sense on
a large system where you have to give more than one person root rights for some
things but do not want to give them this power for everything. On a system
where there is only one person who can do everything
On Sat, Jun 23, 2001 at 10:59:47AM -0500, Ken Januski wrote:
> Let me rephrase the question. I've never used fakeroot or sudo but
> realize that they allow root privileges without being root. What I'm
> wondering, and I know this is very basic, is why it is better to do
> wh
ld
> not do this as root, as I did on first box, and instead use fakeroot or
> something similar.
>
> I'm sure there are very good reasons. I'd just like an explanation of
> the problems created by running it as root and the virtues of not doing
> so. Thanks for y
Thanks Ray,
Let me rephrase the question. I've never used fakeroot or sudo but
realize that they allow root privileges without being root. What I'm
wondering, and I know this is very basic, is why it is better to do
whatever you're doing as a fake root rather than as the real root?
If you are using kernel-package you have to have root rights to compile it.
Using fakeroot lets you do it without being root kind of like sudo.
On Sat, Jun 23, 2001 at 10:40:34AM -0500, Ken Januski wrote:
> Thanks to all who've helped me in recompiling my kernel. I used
> kernel-pac
Thanks to all who've helped me in recompiling my kernel. I used
kernel-package on one debian box and it worked fine. But now I'm about
to do it on another more important box and I'd like to know why I should
not do this as root, as I did on first box, and instead use fakero
On Saturday 02 June 2001 21:36, Harry Henry Gebel wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 02, 2001 at 05:55:35AM +0800, csj wrote:
> > With fakeroot 0.4.4-9.2, a build exits with
> >
> > [stderr abridged and graciously spaced for clarity]
> >
> > /usr/bin/perl: err
On Sat, Jun 02, 2001 at 05:55:35AM +0800, csj wrote:
> With fakeroot 0.4.4-9.2, a build exits with
>
> [stderr abridged and graciously spaced for clarity]
>
> /usr/bin/perl: error while loading shared libraries:
> libfakeroot.so.0: cannot open shared object fil
With fakeroot 0.4.4-9.2, a build exits with
[stderr abridged and graciously spaced for clarity]
/usr/bin/perl: error while loading shared libraries:
libfakeroot.so.0: cannot open shared object file: No such file or
directory
dh_shlibdeps: command returned error code
make
pgpPFqMm660QW.pgp
Description: PGP message
49 matches
Mail list logo
