On Sun, 22 Nov 2009 16:17:36 +1000 Allan McRae <[email protected]> wrote:
> Ray Rashif wrote: > > 2009/11/22 Gerardo Exequiel Pozzi <[email protected]> > > > >> Lukáš Jirkovský wrote: > >>> 2009/11/21 Gerardo Exequiel Pozzi <[email protected]>: > >>> > >>>> [email protected] wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> On Sat, 21 Nov 2009 14:24:58 -0300 > >>>>> Gerardo Exequiel Pozzi <[email protected]> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>> Andrea Scarpino wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> Why do you use package() function when the package isn't a > >>>>>>> splitted package? > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> Hello :) > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Using both build() and package() is not necessary condition > >>>>>> for use only with splitted packages, its avoid to use the > >>>>>> fakeroot on building process that is not needed in 99% of > >>>>>> packages. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Good luck! > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> Sorry, but I consider the use of fakeroot a good thing, it helps > >>>>> to reveal errors while packaging/creating the PKGBUILD at > >>>>> least. Don't know why it should be avoided. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> fakeroot make a table of function pointers for many file > >>>> manipulation calls, like open(), close(), chmod() and etc -> > >>>> overhead, slowdowns (small of course) > >>>> During the build process file perms are not necessary to be > >>>> "tracked", or at least in 99% of packages. Only during the > >>>> install process is only needed. > >>>> > >>>> If you have an example that breaks this, please let me know ;) > >>>> > >>>> -- > >>>> Gerardo Exequiel Pozzi ( djgera ) > >>>> http://www.djgera.com.ar > >>>> KeyID: 0x1B8C330D > >>>> Key fingerprint = 0CAA D5D4 CD85 4434 A219 76ED 39AB 221B 1B8C > >>>> 330D > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>> Nice feature! I didn't know that using package() avoids using of > >> fakeroot. > >>> Back to my point. There used to be a problem with compilation of > >>> amarok1 package from AUR only because of fakeroot and I guess > >>> that it would also help with building of mplayer (configure > >>> crashes under fakeroot environment and needs to be patched but > >>> maybe it was fixed meanwile alongside with amarok1 problem). So > >>> in some specific cases I can see the point of using separate > >>> package() even when the PKGBUILD builds only one package. > >>> > >>> best, > >>> Lukas > >>> > >>> > >> ;) > >> > >> Most reported crashes on bugtracker are because nvidia libgl, that > >> conflics with libfakeroot, both uses dlsym() (nvidia i don't know > >> why does this, fakeroot do this to fill a table of pointer to > >> functions), the result is a jump to NULL :P > >> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=516024#75 > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Gerardo Exequiel Pozzi ( djgera ) > >> http://www.djgera.com.ar > >> KeyID: 0x1B8C330D > >> Key fingerprint = 0CAA D5D4 CD85 4434 A219 76ED 39AB 221B 1B8C > >> 330D > >> > >> > >> > > Hi Gerardo can you confirm that there are no (owner) permission > > issues when building without fakeroot (i.e all owned by user)? I > > don't see chown anywhere other than extract_sources(). > > > > If your packaging is done properly, then there is no issues. Always > use "install" and not "cp". > > Allan > I've often seen cp used in makefiles, would this cause problems? Would you need to patch those makefiles?
