On Wed, Nov 7, 2018 at 12:05 PM Christian Kujau <li...@nerdbynature.de> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 6 Nov 2018, Brian Norris wrote:
> > > Perhaps both scenarios could be satisfied by having
> > > scripts/setlocalversion first check if .git has write permissions, and
> > > acting accordingly. Looking into history, this actually used to be
> > > done, but cdf2bc632ebc ("scripts/setlocalversion on write-protected
> > > source tree", 2013-06-14) removed the updating of the index.
> >
> > A "writeable" check (e.g., [ -w . ]) would be sufficient for our case.
> > But I'm not so sure about that older NFS report, and I'm also not sure
> > that we should be writing to the source tree at all in this case. Maybe
> > we can also check whether there's a build output directory specified?
>
> FWIW, the issue I reported back in 2013[0] was not an ill-configured NFS
> export, but a read-only NFS export (and then a read-write exported NFS
> export, but the user compiling the kernel did not have write permission)
> and so "test -w .git" did not help in determining if the source tree can
> actually written to. And depending on the user's shell[1], this may or may
> not still be the case.Hmm, interesting. The result of "test -w ." depends on the implementation of "test" command. Bash's build-in 'test' did a good job for me; "test -w ." returns 1 for read-only mounted NFS. For Busybox's 'test', "test -w ." returns 0 for read-only (or writable, but without no-root-squash) NFS. > So I'm all for the $(touch .git/some-file-here) test to decide if the > kernel has to be modified during build. > > Christian. > > [0] https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/6/14/574 > [1] https://manpages.debian.org/unstable/dash/dash.1.en.html > > > > However, I admit I don't understand the justification in that commit > > > from 2013. I'm no NFS expert, but perhaps the real problem there is an > > > incorrectly configured NFS setup (uid/gid mismatch between NFS > > > client/server, or permissions mismatch between mount options and NFS > > > server?). Christian Kujau: can you speak to that? > > > > > > Well, we could also make our check $(touch .git/some-file-here > > > 2>/dev/null && ...) instead of $(test -w .git) to handle misconfigured > > > NFS setups. But not sure if that has its own problems. > > > > Trying to 'touch' the source tree will also break us. No matter whether > > you redirect stderr, our sandbox will still notice the build is doing > > something fishy and complain. > > -- > BOFH excuse #192: > > runaway cat on system. -- Best Regards Masahiro Yamada
