Bug#354344: [Buildd-tools-devel] Bug#354344: Fix in 354344 breaks
plain chroots
Roger Leigh
rleigh at whinlatter.ukfsn.org
Wed Jul 5 22:51:37 UTC 2006
"Steve M. Robbins" <steven.robbins at videotron.ca> writes:
> On Mon, Jul 03, 2006 at 11:10:46PM +0100, Roger Leigh wrote:
>> "Steve M. Robbins" <steven.robbins at videotron.ca> writes:
>
>> Because the automatic mounting is being used by a few people, and it
>> is a convenient way to do things, I'm going to introduce a new chroot
>> type which will be "plain+mounts".
>
> Doesn't that leave you open to someone requesting both "file" and
> "file+mounts" chroot types?
No. "plain" is special, since it's just a plain directory in the
filesystem. All the other types involve some element of
mounting/copying/unpacking and the mounting is part of the chroot
setup (if enabled with run-setup-scripts). "plain" defaults to /not/
running the setup scripts, where the other types all run them by
default.
> At the risk of displaying my ignorance of schroot: I'm having a hard
> time understanding why automatic mounting is deemed always useful for
> "non-plain" chroots and (currently) deemed not useful for "plain"
> chroots. As I understand it, the chroot type describes the source of
> the chroot filesystem. To me, that seems orthogonal to the question
> of whether you want "/home" mounted.
That's a good point. In addition to my comment above, there are some
additional points:
- Currently, having run-setup-scripts=true runs all the scripts.
There's no way to skip the /home mounting script, or indeed any
other script. It would be nice to be able to customise which
scripts are run (or have an effect, at least) on a per-chroot basis.
- "plain" is supposed to be plain. It's the default because it's used
to be compatible with dchroot(1), dchroot-dsa(1) and chroot(8). It
doesn't do anything fancy for that reason.
I think I'll create a "directory" chroot type; this will be similar to
plain, but will enable all the features plain lacks in comparision
with the other chroot types.
> So: rather than a new chroot type, why not introduce a new option, say
> "auto-mount", for this? Personally, I'd default it to true; but
> you're the boss.
The main reason not to do this is for compatiblity with other tools,
and to do the least surprising thing.
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=329403
is an example of why it defaults to being conservative.
Regards,
Roger
--
Roger Leigh
Printing on GNU/Linux? http://gutenprint.sourceforge.net/
Debian GNU/Linux http://www.debian.org/
GPG Public Key: 0x25BFB848. Please sign and encrypt your mail.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 188 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/buildd-tools-devel/attachments/20060705/73df0f79/attachment.pgp
More information about the Buildd-tools-devel
mailing list