On 4/10/19 2:48 PM, Frank Scheiner wrote: > UPDATE: > I tested that change with [1] in "normal" installation mode and it still > complains with "permission denied". It works through though, when I make > "mkhfs-bootstrap.sh" executable. I then tested with a "real" sh locally > and it behaves the same. It works with just `sh '[...]'` and > `mkhfs-bootstrap.sh` without execute permissions. > > So I now included a modified change (without ` -c`,) rebased to current > master of the upstream branch and force pushed it to my feature branch > on salsa.d.o. The MR is at [2].
Good that we tested that. FWIW, I still find the design of gitlab/salsa suboptimal. When I click your link, I am getting your 4-week-old pull request without all the current changes. > But I actually wonder why `mkhfs-bootstrap.sh` doesn't get installed > with execute permissions, because the `grub-installer` script retains > its execute permissions when installed and both have the same > permissions in the git repo: Because your patch applied to the local package I created did not add executable permissions. But relying on these permissions isn't reliable anyway, so the cleaner way is to add the "sh" prefix. > ...and I also don't see any specific differences for `grub-installer` > compared to `mkhfs-bootstrap.sh` in `debian/grub-installer.install`, > except for the destination path (`/usr/bin` and > `/usr/lib/grub-installer` respectively). FWIW, could you rename "mkhfs-bootstrap.sh" to "mk-hfs-bootstrap.sh" for consistency? > Any idea where the permissions when installed are actually configured? You are confusing your git tree with the local package I built. Adrian -- .''`. John Paul Adrian Glaubitz : :' : Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org `. `' Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de `- GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546 0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913
