Roderick Schertler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Wed, 22 Nov 2006 21:00:33 +0100, Goswin von Brederlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> said:
>>
>> Didn't /proc/mounts used to list the paths relative to the current
>> chroot? As is it is very broken.
>
> That isn't good, but I don't think it's something which I should be
> trying to fix. For a program working at this level, I think it should
> be able to assume that /etc/mtab or /proc/mounts is correct if present.
>
> Do you think this is unreasonable? If you think it's important I could
> change it to check only /etc/mtab, and to succeed if that's missing.
>
> --
> Roderick Schertler
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I don't think it is unreasonable to assume an existing /etc/mtab (real
or link) contains usefull information. If the test fails with a
insightfull error message if mtab is missing or broken that should
give buildd admins or users enough of a clue to fix the issue and
retry. Something like "Test failed, please check that /etc/mtab exists
and contains correct informations."
On the other hand it doesn't hurt to skip the test if /etc/mtab is
missing. That case is easy enough to detect. A broken mtab (like link
to /proc/mounts now seems to be inside a chroot) is harder to
detect. I think I would fail then.
MfG
Goswin
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
