Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 16:38:12 -0500 From: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> To: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> Cc: freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: linprocfs and linux_base port upgrade Message-ID: <20060221213812.GA69006@xor.obsecurity.org> In-Reply-To: <20060221210659.GA64256@xor.obsecurity.org> References: <59887930@srv.sem.ipt.ru> <20060221210659.GA64256@xor.obsecurity.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--mP3DRpeJDSE+ciuQ Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Feb 21, 2006 at 04:07:00PM -0500, Kris Kennaway wrote: > On Tue, Feb 21, 2006 at 03:52:05PM +0300, Boris Samorodov wrote: > > Hi! > >=20 > >=20 > > Assume that one has a linux_base port installed and linprocfs is > > mounted. The task is to upgrade the linux_base port. We do: > > - Un-mounting linprocfs; > > - deletting /compat/linux (along /compat/linux/proc); > > - ... > >=20 > > The problem: a short period of time (well, it may be not so short > > accoring to various curcumstances) exists when there _is no_ > > /compat/linux/proc directory and linprocfs _is_ defined at > > /etc/fstab. If something goes wrong when upgrading (system panic, port > > upgrading errors, etc) one can get an unbootable machine. > >=20 > > I think that a linux_base port should: > > - comment the linprocfs definition right after removing > > /compat/linux/proc directory; > > - remove the comment after creating the needed directory. > >=20 > > The comment itself should be a readable and unique one (ie all > > linux_base ports should use the same text). Ex.: > > "#*linux_base autocomment*". > >=20 > >=20 > > Do you have some other ideas? >=20 > Actually, this unmount ... remount situation is pretty evil. For > example, it prevents users from building linux_base in a jail. In > fact I'd like to switch to building packages in jails instead of > chroots on the package cluster, but this is the major reason I can't. Not to mention that the umount isn't always reliable for some reason: the linux_base-8 package build often fails with this: =3D=3D=3D> Checking if emulators/linux_base-8 already installed Un-mounting linprocfs... kern.fallback_elf_brand: -1 -> 3 redhat-release-8.0-8.noarch.rpm glibc-common-2.3.2-4.80.8.i386.rpm glibc-2.3.2-4.80.8.i386.rpm setup-2.5.20-1.noarch.rpm filesystem-2.1.6-5.noarch.rpm unpacking of archive failed on file /proc: cpio: chown failed - Operation n= ot supported *** Error code 1 Kris --mP3DRpeJDSE+ciuQ Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFD+4hDWry0BWjoQKURAvq2AKC0xaKYJoq7risykN0jMjCA+HsOLwCg8zUA sW2wBcIQ1PYHUP92W9sVLfA= =p5nY -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --mP3DRpeJDSE+ciuQ--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060221213812.GA69006>