Re: Arla 0.42-RC2

On Aug 22, 2006, at 17:09 , Tomas Olsson wrote:

> [email protected] (Niels Möller) writes:
>> I don't quite agree, I understand that I have to set up a full chroot
>> environment if I want to exec new programs and stuff, but to have to
>> do it also for chroot isn't very nice. If nothing else, it makes it a
>> lot harder to use chroot in portable server programs portable, since
>> the set names of the files you need to copy into the chroot can be
>> very different between systems.
>>
> True. I doubt it is at all possible to figure out what is needed.  
> libraries
> can probably be figured out, but the complete set of files and helper
> programs accessed is... "tricky".

It's already difficult:  nss modules, iconv modules, potentially pam  
modules, on Solaris you need some magic network-related  
devices, ....  SUS2 is correct in stating that it's not portable at  
all.  If you want to use chroot, expect pain.

As such, it'd probably be smart not to have arla use it by default;  
make it an option, let whoever's packaging it for a distribution do  
the legwork if they want to use chroot (that's their job anyway).

-- 
brandon s. allbery     [linux,solaris,freebsd,perl]       
[email protected]
system administrator  [openafs,heimdal,too many hats]   
[email protected]
electrical and computer engineering, carnegie mellon university       
KF8NH