On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 8:32 PM, Joseph Rushton Wakeling < joseph.wakel...@webdrake.net> wrote:
> Hello folks, > > Is there anyone here working on snapd on Arch? > > I ask because I recently tried it out on a fresh Arch install and ran into > some issues. > > Installing snaps works fine in itself, and snap list is able to find the > installed snaps. However, these issues arose as soon as I started trying > to use them: > > * snap --version lists 'unknown' for snap, snapd and arch > > * all snap-related stuff is placed in /var/lib/snapd/snap instead of > /snap > (fine in itself), but the PATH still contains /snap/bin rather than > /var/lib/snapd/snap/bin. > > - according to https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Snapd#Installing > , > installing a snap should cause it to be mounted to /snap/snapname > but this doesn't appear to be happening > Looks like the package changed recently then, after the rdocumentation was written. Do we have details on who's done that and why? /snap still feels so much better. * installing my ldc2 snap (`snap install --classic --candidate ldc2`) > worked > fine (it shows up in `snap list` as expected) but if I try to run > /var/lib/snapd/snap/bin/ldc2 directly I get an error message: > > execv failed: No such file or directory > What is it pointing to? * attempting to run the actual underlying binary within the snap, i.e. > /var/lib/snapd/snap/ldc2/current/bin/ldc2 (or any of the other > binaries > there) results in a similar error message: > > -bash: ./ldc2: No such file or directory > This was never supposed to be done. Exposed content is supposed to work as done above. Running `file ldc2` on the binary reveals what I would assume is correct > information: > > ELF 64-bit LSB executable, x86-64, version 1 (GNU/Linux), dynamically > linked, interpreter /snap/core/current/lib/x86_64-linux/gnu/ld-2.23.so > , > for GNU/Linux 2.6.32, BuildID[sha1]=[I'm not typing this out], not > stripped, with debug_info > > ... and uname -m gives x86_64, so I don't think it can be an issue like > trying to run a 32-bit package on a 64-bit system (or vice versa). > > For comparison I tried installing both hello-world and Michael > Hudson-Doyle's go snap. hello-world ran fine (but it is after all only a > shell script underneath). The go snap ran into the same issues as my ldc2 > snap. > > I assume these are known issues, but can anyone advise on what are the > fundamental problems here and on whether it's expected to be addressed soon? > Most of these issues seem to be related to the move out of /snap, perhaps done too quickly. I'd suggest returning /snap to its place, at least until those issues are sorted out there. gustavo @ http://niemeyer.net -- Snapcraft mailing list Snapcraft@lists.snapcraft.io Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/snapcraft