On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 12:16:17PM +0000, Mattia Rizzolo wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 02:21:38PM +0300, Niko Tyni wrote:
> > Apparently the test fails when it can't find any "regular" (as opposed
> > to "special") filesystems. In this age of building on virtual hosts
> > and chroots, I'm not sure this is a valid assumption, though it does
> > look strange that the build on reproducible.d.n doesn't report anything
> > mounted as the root file system.
> I've no clue which file systems are considered "regular" and which ones
> are "special" for Sys::Filesystem,
Reading lib/Sys/Filesystem/Linux.pm, the full list of "special"file system
binfmt_misc, debugfs, devpts, fusectl, fuse.gvfs-fuse-daemon,
mini_fo, nfsd, proc, procbususb, securityfs, swap, sysfs, tmpfs,
> but what I'm pretty confident about
> is that a pbuilder's /proc/mounts usually contains no entry for the root
> file system.
> So I assume the absence of an entry for / is not the cause of the ftbfs,
> since that's also what happen on "build 1" (and on the test build I just
> ran here locally).
There's lots of diagnostic output in the build1 log including
# filesystem - mounted - special - device - options - format - volume - label
# / - 1 - 0 - /dev/vda1 - rw,relatime,errors=remount-ro,data=ordered - ext4 -
1 - 1 - ext4
and a long list of other file systems like things under
It looks like these come from either /etc/fstab or /proc/mounts. So
perhaps the difference between the chroots is in /etc/fstab ?
Still not sure how much of this can be expected from a 'sane' build
Niko Tyni nt...@debian.org
Reproducible-builds mailing list