Re: problems with 10r5

From: Michele Andreoli (
Date: Tue Nov 28 2000 - 23:35:58 CET

On Tue, Nov 28, 2000 at 05:04:57PM +0100, Dumas Patrice nicely wrote:
> > note: the are some mistakes in the mu script i thing
> > /usr/local/bin/ldconfig does not exist
> it is not a mistake, I think but a site dependant configuration... Maybe by Michele's
> /usr/local/bin/ldconfig exists. Maybe
> chroot $TREE /usr/local/bin/ldconfig
> could be replaced by
> chroot $TREE `which ldconfig`
> but the fact that ldconfig isn't run in tree doesn't prevent mu to be build on my system.

Yes, "chroot $TREE `which ldconfig`" seems a very smart solution, but
the shell interpreter break your dream, Patrice!
Indeed, caused by its internal working mode, the command `which ldconfig`
is parsed in the actual context (i.e the user's Linux system), resulting
in a micidial "/sbin/ldconfig"!

chroot (for those that do not know this nice utility) runs a supplied
command changing the "root" for it. For example, if you (from muLinux),
mount another Linux disk under /mnt, you will get a prompt in the new
Linux with "chroot /mnt bash" (I use the trick regularly)

Anycase, after better test, also the bare "chroot $TREE ldconfig"
work fine :-)

> > and when creating USR mu deletes the images and does then a mkfs (unsuccessfully of cause)
> it seems strange to me, I recalled that mu first used a mount point to mount loop filesystem, and
> then cdreate the usr filesystem on it, bzip it and only then copy it to USR.bz2. So why was
> mkfs.ext2 unsuccessfull ?

Surely the user added some other material in the tree/: after that,
all is impredictable.


In summing up, I wish I had some kind of affirmative message to leave
you with, I don't. Would you take two negative messages? - Woody Allen
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.6 : Sat Feb 08 2003 - 15:27:17 CET