[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> This is exactly the same as setting up a ChrootCompile environment and
> running a shell inside it instead of Compile.
That's very interesting; I'd like to give that a go. Do you think you
could give an example? I haven't had the opportunity to do much with
ChrootComp
Jonatan Liljedahl wrote:
> You should check out the ROX desktop environment. It uses the idea of
> AppDirs. And there's a lot of apps out there that can be converted
> easily into appdirs, even though there's also a lot apps that can't
> because they get hardcoded paths in them when compiled..
I
On 7/30/07, Lucas C. Villa Real <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 7/29/07, mpb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > So write a "UseProgram" tool to manage PATH for you.
> >
> > > * It uses the binary path directly, whereas GoboLinux seems to be
> promoting
> > > the notion of the Program as a whole, which
Paul Dann wrote:
> MLA-Gobo wrote:
>> On Friday 27 July 2007 13:44, Paul Dann wrote:
>>
>>> My thoughts
>>> particularly lie with programs being re-locatable (ie not necessarily in
>>> the /Programs dir).
>>>
>> Out of curiosity, what do you see as the advantage for this?
>>
> Well
mpb wrote:
> How does Compile not already work for both root and non-root users?
>
It works fine, but it's not completely "safe". One of the problems
Recipes and Packages face is the dependency list. ChrootCompile is
designed to use an isolated environment so that we can be sure that the
rec
On 7/29/07, mpb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So write a "UseProgram" tool to manage PATH for you.
>
> > * It uses the binary path directly, whereas GoboLinux seems to be promoting
> > the notion of the Program as a whole, which is a good idea in my opinion.
> > If possible, the average user should
On 7/29/07, Paul Dann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Well, the reasons for having ChrootCompile seem to me to apply just as
> much to a single user as an admin. For the sake of simplicity, I think it's
> best to have a single tool to compile, whether you're a user or admin.
How does Compile not
mpb wrote:
> The "chroot" system call fails when run as non-root.
>
> However, you could make an suid wrapper just for ChrootCompile. You
> would need root access to set the wrapper up, be thereafter non-root
> users could run ChrootCompile.
>
Yes, that sounds good. Would there be problems i
On 7/28/07, Paul Dann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>That's great. I'd also really love it if it were possible to
> ChrootCompile programs as an unprivileged user. Is there any reason that's
> not possible, given that we're building in a fake root anyway?
The "chroot" system call fails when ru
Hisham Muhammad wrote:
> Yes, that's the plan. It's a unionfs-style solution, but not using
> unionfs directly because it doesn't scale too well for hundreds of
> layers (it's just not what it was designed for) and we have some other
> stuff in mind related to versioning beyond just merging layers.
On 7/27/07, Isaac Dupree <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Paul Dann wrote:
> > I found a post somewhere (that I can't find any more!) that mentioned
> > a plan that I understood to be something along the lines of replacing
> > the program symlinking solution with a unionfs-based system. Did I
> > un
Paul Dann wrote:
> I found a post somewhere (that I can't find any more!) that mentioned
> a plan that I understood to be something along the lines of replacing
> the program symlinking solution with a unionfs-based system. Did I
> understand this correctly?
Actually I think the eventual plan i
MLA-Gobo wrote:
> On Friday 27 July 2007 13:44, Paul Dann wrote:
>
>> My thoughts
>> particularly lie with programs being re-locatable (ie not necessarily in
>> the /Programs dir).
>>
> Out of curiosity, what do you see as the advantage for this?
>
Well, what if an unprivileged use
On Friday 27 July 2007 13:44, Paul Dann wrote:
> My thoughts
> particularly lie with programs being re-locatable (ie not necessarily in
> the /Programs dir).
Out of curiosity, what do you see as the advantage for this?
> I believe ChrootCompile produces packages, is that right? (I'm
> afraid
14 matches
Mail list logo
