/dev nodes in buildroots Re: x86_64 blocks i386?
Michael Schwendt
bugs.michael at gmx.net
Mon Mar 21 03:31:37 UTC 2005
On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 17:00:47 -1000, Warren Togami wrote:
> Jeremy Katz wrote:
> > On Sun, 2005-03-20 at 20:24 -0500, seth vidal wrote:
> >
> >>About the gpgme[03] problem - I have a sneaking suspicion it has
> >>something to do with dev/udev. I think the lack of a lot of items in dev
> >>is maybe affecting the builds. That's something else I'm planning on
> >>looking at. maybe with a bind-mount to /dev on the normal system.
> >>
> >>we shall see.
> >
> >
> > I'd highly recommend doing this. It's not a huge stretch as it's what
> > we do in the buildroots for Core builds at this point as well.
> >
>
> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 15 Apr 17 2003 fd ->
> ../proc/self/fd
> crw-rw-rw- 1 root root 1, 7 Dec 11 15:49 full
> crw-rw-rw- 1 root root 1, 3 Dec 11 15:49 null
> crw-rw-rw- 1 root root 5, 2 Dec 11 15:49 ptmx
> crw-r--r-- 1 root root 1, 8 Dec 11 15:49 random
> crw-rw-rw- 1 root root 5, 0 Dec 11 15:49 tty
> crw-r--r-- 1 root root 1, 9 Dec 11 15:49 urandom
> crw-rw-rw- 1 root root 1, 5 Dec 11 15:49 zero
>
> Instead I highly recommend creating ONLY these device nodes within
> buildroots. All fedora.us packages have been built with this minimal
> set of nodes for years. This also helps security because disk and many
> other device nodes are kept away from buildroots.
Very good. It was /dev/urandom that fixed it.
More information about the fedora-extras-list
mailing list