Re: archivers/arj fails to build on jail
- Reply: Jesper Schmitz Mouridsen : "Re: archivers/arj fails to build on jail"
- In reply to: Renato Botelho : "Re: archivers/arj fails to build on jail"
- Go to: [ bottom of page ] [ top of archives ] [ this month ]
Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2022 16:03:48 UTC
On 30/08/22 12:39, Renato Botelho wrote: > On 30/08/22 11:35, Jesper Schmitz Mouridsen wrote: >> >> On 30.08.2022 13.17, Renato Botelho wrote: >>> On 29/08/22 20:32, Jesper Schmitz Mouridsen wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> On 29.08.2022 17.29, Renato Botelho wrote: >>>>> There is a PR [1] opened for years reporting arj fails to build on >>>>> a jail. Recently I reproduced it on a system running CURRENT. >>>>> >>>>> I just launched a jail and tried to build it, and got the error as >>>>> described: >>>> Did you use ezjail? >>>> >>>> I tried to replicate and I think the error is triggered by >>>> the nullfs usage of ezjail. I copied the settings of ezjail without >>>> nullfs usage (using the basejail as path adding etc from the failing >>>> jail to it and removing the fstab from jail.conf) and arj did get a >>>> working msgbind. >>> >>> Yes, I also use ezjail. I'm cc'ing ezjail's maintainer to see if we >>> can get some advice. >>> >>> Thanks! >>> >> Hi again. >> >> >> I narrowed this down to symlinks ,wiithin the jail, to the nullfs >> mountpoint. >> >> Replacing symlinks to the basejail mount point with dirs and setting >> this in the fstab of the jail >> >> and msgbind is a valid executable >> >> /usr/jails/basejail/bin /usr/jails/test1/bin nullfs ro 0 0 >> /usr/jails/basejail/boot /usr/jails/test1/boot nullfs ro 0 0 >> /usr/jails/basejail/lib /usr/jails/test1/lib nullfs ro 0 0 >> /usr/jails/basejail/libexec /usr/jails/test1/libexec nullfs ro 0 0 >> /usr/jails/basejail/rescue /usr/jails/test1/rescue nullfs ro 0 0 >> /usr/jails/basejail/sbin /usr/jails/test1/sbin nullfs ro 0 0 >> /usr/jails/basejail/usr/bin /usr/jails/test1/usr/bin nullfs ro 0 0 >> /usr/jails/basejail/usr/lib /usr/jails/test1/usr/lib nullfs ro 0 0 >> /usr/jails/basejail/usr/include /usr/jails/test1/usr/include nullfs ro >> 0 0 >> /usr/jails/basejail/usr/lib32 /usr/jails/test1/usr/lib32 nullfs ro 0 0 >> /usr/jails/basejail/usr/ports /usr/jails/test1/usr/ports nullfs ro 0 0 >> /usr/jails/basejail/usr/libdata /usr/jails/test1/usr/libdata nullfs ro >> 0 0 >> /usr/jails/basejail/usr/sbin /usr/jails/test1/usr/sbin nullfs ro 0 0 >> /usr/jails/basejail/usr/share /usr/jails/test1/usr/share nullfs ro 0 0 >> /usr/jails/basejail/usr/libexec /usr/jails/test1/usr/libexec nullfs ro >> 0 0 >> /usr/jails/basejail/usr/src /usr/jails/test1/usr/src nullfs ro 0 0 >> >> It should be further narrowed down but nullfs alone is not the issue. > > Interesting. And just to add a note here, I copied msgbind from jail to > host and tried to execute it to confirm binary was really bad and I got > the same Abort trap message. > And one more interesting information is it builds fine with gcc. I just added USE_GCC=yes to the port and it worked. -- Renato Botelho