Hi Luca,
Luca Capello wrote:
>
> On Thu, 19 Mar 2009 17:32:34 +0100, Steffen Moeller wrote:
>> The following commit has been merged in the master branch:
>> commit 50c870bd1e33805ce150177e3256c7c4d65f5b88
>> Author: Steffen Moeller <[email protected]>
>> Date: Wed Mar 18 13:36:13 2009 +0100
>>
>> Added APT_OPTIONS to install of wicd
>>
>> Responing "n" to the question if wicd should be installed
>> will stop the installation process.
> [...]
>> diff --git a/install.sh b/install.sh
>> index a013290..3129466 100755
>> --- a/install.sh
>> +++ b/install.sh
>> @@ -119,6 +119,30 @@
>> TAR_PACKAGE=$INST_MIRROR/pool/main/t/tar/tar_1.20-1_armel.deb
>> # FUNCTIONS
>> #
>>
>> +# for the installation of packages, /proc is sometimes required to be
>> +# installed. cdebootstrap is installing it itself.
>
> Again, please perform two commits in such a case:
I did. I only did not push twice. I'll do some more "man git".
>
> - the first one about APT_OPTIONS for wicd
>
> - the second one about /proc being mounted in the chroot, since
> according to the commit log you are touching nothing else than wicd
>
>> @@ -696,6 +720,7 @@ action_mount () {
>> fi
>> fi
>> echo "I: microSD card partitions mounted"
>> +
>
> This is a cosmetic change which should be committed separately.
True. I need to notice that I was doing it, first :)
> Going back to the subject of this mail: why /proc must be mounted at
> all?
I spotted a few apt-get installs to have failed because of a missing /proc. So
I felt,
that since cdebootstrap also mounts it, that it would be the right thing to do.
> I cannot see how this affect installation of wicd:
I did not care if some subtask would be affected or not, I just wanted to be
sure
that (except for the task debian that runs cdebootstrap, which in turn will
fail if
/proc is attempted to be mounted a second time) we have /proc available when
apt-get is
executed, since a few packages are expecting that. If that is a bug of those
packages,
then I am happily submitting bug reports to those packages, instead.
There is a danger that the installation kills processes that run on the host,
presuming
they were of their own. But this would be but of that respective post-inst
script and we
should fix that, right? Are there other reasons why /proc should not be
available?
Ah, I just found your question about failing packages below ... I'll produce a
list. There
are plenty of checks for /proc in *.postinst, that is for sure, which can be
observed by
$ grep "/proc/" /var/lib/dpkg/info/*.postinst
but admittedly I need to find those that fail, still.
Many greetings
Steffen
_______________________________________________
pkg-fso-maint mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-fso-maint
