Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 14:41:15 +0300 From: Boris Samorodov <bsam@ipt.ru> To: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> Cc: Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@Leidinger.net>, freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org Subject: Re: linprocfs and linux_base port upgrade Message-ID: <97310068@srv.sem.ipt.ru> In-Reply-To: <20060222105503.GA86596@xor.obsecurity.org> (Kris Kennaway's message of "Wed, 22 Feb 2006 05:55:03 -0500") References: <28edec3c0602211753p7290e85q3fb23d799c0cf0fc@mail.gmail.com> <20060222015924.GA74781@xor.obsecurity.org> <28edec3c0602211901j63066e01te585c12a42057d1e@mail.gmail.com> <20060222030810.GA75798@xor.obsecurity.org> <20060222111658.2589ilcqo40w8ccs@netchild.homeip.net> <20060222105503.GA86596@xor.obsecurity.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 22 Feb 2006 05:55:03 -0500 Kris Kennaway wrote: > On Wed, Feb 22, 2006 at 11:16:58AM +0100, Alexander Leidinger wrote: > > Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> wrote: > > > > Regarding the question of the OP: changing "ro" to "ro,noauto" has a similar > > effect in the race-case. > > > > >On Wed, Feb 22, 2006 at 11:01:57AM +0800, Mars G. Miro wrote: > > > > > >>> No, it's because it tried and failed to umount linprocfs. Presumably > > >>> you didnt have linprocfs mounted in your jail, but some packages > > >> > > >>Well mounting/unmounting stuff inside the jail is a pain. I now recall > > >>I had to mount linprocfs from the host to the jail, thus I was able to > > >>build them. Hrm, perhaps its time for jail_<jailname>_linprocfs_enable > > >>(as with devfs inside a jail) ... > > > > > >I think you're missing my point: if you don't have linprocfs mounted, > > >ports like jdk will fail. If you do have it mounted, ports like > > >linux_base will fail [because they need to umount it and remount it]. > > > > > >The latter should be fixed so that you can consistently set up a jail > > >and have it work in both cases. > > > > Perhaps (completely untested): > > @exec mkdir -p %D/proc || true > > @dirrmtry proc > > @unexec [ ! -d %D/proc ] || echo "+++ Please unmount linprocfs and remove > > %D/proc by hand!" > > and not touching linprocfs at all. > > > > Kris, would this work on pointyhat? > I don't think so: I posted a log excerpt of what fails when linprocfs > remains mounted (because the umount doesn't work somehow) during the > install. cpio needs to be told somehow not to try and write into > /proc. Yes, I managed to reproduce that error: - mount linprocfs; - cd /compat/linux/proc - try to install linux_base-8 at another shell. Unmounting doesn't occure thus instal ending with the error. The current linux_base-8 port uses the linux rpm binary to install software (which apparently is trying to chown the proc directory and fails): ----- unpacking of archive failed on file /proc: cpio: chown failed - Operation not supported ----- A new linux_base port I'm working on doesn't use the linux rpm to install the software. This port installs without errors even with unmounted linprocfs. I'll change my port so it won't do auto [u]mount. Then this port may be build at jails. For users and admins the port will echo messages (to [u]mount linprocfs and deletting proc manually if needed). WBR -- Boris B. Samorodov, Research Engineer InPharmTech Co, http://www.ipt.ru Telephone & Internet Service Provider
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?97310068>