From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Petazzoni Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2016 10:33:43 +0200 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH 0/2] fs: fix fakeroot issue with SElinux contexts In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20161029103343.7e4647b5@free-electrons.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net Hello, On Sat, 29 Oct 2016 10:26:38 +0200, Yann E. MORIN wrote: > This series is an attempt at fixing fakeroot, which has issues with > SElinux contexts (in extended attributes), as reported as one of our > bug report, but also reported in Fedora Core and Debian: > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1238802 > https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=799858 > > Since there has been absolutely no activity on the upstream (== Debian) > report since it was filled more than a year ago, follow the path > suggested in the FC report, and switch to using pseudo as a replacement > for fakeroot. > > This can probably go in right now. If there are issues, we can still > revert this before the end of the stabilisation month. There are lots of other references to fakeroot all over the place, both in fs/common.mk, but also the relatively new option we have to call a script within the fakeroot context. Do we keep them as-is, or do we rename everything to "pseudo" ? I find the name "pseudo" very confusing, while "fakeroot" is a lot clearer, so perhaps it is OK to keep everything named fakeroot even though in practice we're using pseudo. Best regards, Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering http://free-electrons.com