[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [Cluster-devel] gfs2-utils "make install" failure and fix



On Mon, 2009-06-29 at 15:26 +0200, Jim Meyering wrote:
> Fabio M. Di Nitto wrote:
> > On Mon, 2009-06-29 at 11:24 +0200, Jim Meyering wrote:
> >> With an explicit --prefix, "make install" would install into /sbin regardless:
> >>
> >>   $ ./configure --prefix=/p/p/coro
> >>   ...
> >>   $ make install
> >>   make[1]: Entering directory `/h/meyering/w/co/gfs2-utils/gfs2/mkfs'
> >>   /p/bin/install -c -d /sbin
> >>   make[1]: Nothing to be done for `install-data-am'.
> >>   /p/bin/install -c -m 755 mkfs.gfs2 /sbin
> >>   /p/bin/install: cannot create regular file `/sbin/mkfs.gfs2': Permission denied
> >>   make[1]: *** [install-exec-local] Error 1
> >>   make[1]: Leaving directory `/h/meyering/w/co/gfs2-utils/gfs2/mkfs'
> >>   make: *** [install-am] Error 2
> >>
> >> Along the way I noticed the Makefile.am files
> >> were using noinst_PROGRAMS and adding their own install rules.
> >> It's easier/cleaner/etc. to use sbin_PROGRAMS.
> >> Here's the patch:
> >>
> >> >From d794b4e7948741f5d6767970a2fde2c5fce15947 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> >> From: Jim Meyering <meyering redhat com>
> >> Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2009 11:23:09 +0200
> >> Subject: [PATCH gfs2-utils] Use automake's sbin_PROGRAMS, rather than writing our own rules.
> >>
> >> This also fixes a "make install" failure to honor --prefix.
> >> * gfs2/mount/Makefile.am (sbin_PROGRAMS): Use sbin_PROGRAMS,
> >> not noinst_PROGRAMS.
> >> (install-exec-local, uninstall-local): Remove rules.
> >> Automake automates this when you define sbin_PROGRAMS.
> >> * gfs2/fsck/Makefile.am (sbin_PROGRAMS): Likewise.
> >> (install-exec-local, uninstall-local): Remove rules.
> >> * gfs2/mkfs/Makefile.am (sbin_PROGRAMS): Likewise.
> >> (install-exec-local, uninstall-local): Remove rules.
> >> (install-exec-hook, uninstall-hook): Remove unnecessary sub-shells.
> >> ---
> >>  gfs2/fsck/Makefile.am  |   10 +---------
> >>  gfs2/mkfs/Makefile.am  |   16 ++++------------
> >>  gfs2/mount/Makefile.am |   10 +---------
> >>  3 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 30 deletions(-)
> >
> > This is the same problem we discussed in another occasion (can't
> > remember which one).
> >
> > Those 3 binaries need to go in /sbin. mount(8) looks for mount helpers
> > only in /sbin. Without the helper we fail to mount gfs2 or /usr could be
> > on a gfs2 filesystem.. chicken egg?
> >
> > sbin_PROGRAM will install them in /usr/sbin that is not correct (in the
> > default case of course). All distro ship fsck* and mkfs* also in /sbin
> > in order to check the filesystem (without /usr mounted) or reformat
> > (same reason).
> >
> > Handling of prefix can be better I agree, but turning them into
> > sbin_PROGRAM doesn't work either.
> >
> > Clearly I am open to any better solution than the one I have in place...
> 
> Sure.
> There's already so much default-munging going on in configure.ac,
> why not add a tiny bit more.
> 
> This incremental patch does what you seem to want:
> 
>     In case we're using the default (/usr) prefix
>     and the default exec_prefix, and set sbindir to /sbin:
> 
> diff --git a/configure.ac b/configure.ac
> index a568463..ca0301e 100644
> --- a/configure.ac
> +++ b/configure.ac
> @@ -38,6 +38,7 @@ fi
> 
>  case $exec_prefix in
>    NONE)   exec_prefix=$prefix;;
> +          test "$prefix:$sbindir" = '/usr:${exec_prefix}/sbin' && sbindir=/sbin
>    prefix) exec_prefix=$prefix;;
>  esac

hmmmm... wouldn't that move all sbin_PROGRAMS to /sbin (assuming we are
doing default build)? If so that's still not ideal because except those
3 binaries, all the others can go (and should go) in /usr/sbin as they
are not vital for the FS operations.

I am sorry to play the devil advocate here....

Fabio


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]