On Wed, 2015-09-23 at 19:08 +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote: > Svante Signell, le Wed 23 Sep 2015 15:45:13 +0200, a écrit : > > This test fails with fakeroot-hurd on Hurd due to that /non > > -existant is > > writable for faked nodes according to: > > No. Check what happens in the testcase again. It fails due to / > being announced as writable by fakeroot (see the recursive call to > check_directory in the ENOENT case).
Sorry, I meant / is writable, the file attempted to create is /non -existant > > running it as real root of course returns *is_writable=1 and > > errno="No > > such file or directory" on both Linux and Hurd. > > Take care that the errno value should not be looked at when the > function > succeeded. It may be just a leftover from a previous call, or even > something else, it's really undefined. Yes, errno is not interesting when access(2) succeeds. Sorry again for not being clear to omit errno in the text for that case. Of course I meant what you just wrote :) > > Maybe even the tests should not be run under fakeroot at all as is > > done now with fakeroot debian/rules binary? > > That is very questionable, yes. Checks should be done in the build > target, not in the binary target. Running tests in fakeroot does not > make much sense to me. Seems like dh does this by default now, see debian/rules. From the build log debian/rules build make: 'build' is up to date. fakeroot debian/rules binary dh binary --with autoreconf ... dh_auto_test make -j1 check > All that being said, we should probably not let the programs inside > fakeroot believe they can write to / (because they may then try to, > while they can't actually). > > > The attached patch makes the behaviour the same as on Linux and > > fakeroot-tcp. The question is which behaviour is the expected one. > > It is indeed tempting do do this change. ... > I'm almost believing it's the right thing to do, I'm just afraid of > corner cases. What reassures me is that in both attempt_mkfile and > attempt_chmod, we always add RUSR and WUSR permissions on the real > node (and XUSR when it makes sense), and so for files created inside > the fakeroot session (i.e. those which have FAKE_MODE, for which we > do change the code here), the behavior will be the same in the end. > The only exception is /, which does have FAKE_MODE set in main(), but > already exists and shouldn't be made writable. AIUI, this is exactly > where your proposed change actually change a behavior, and is > precisely > what you intended to do. > > Could somebody else double-check my reasoning is correct? > (we have to be careful with these permissions, we need to converge to > something that just does has the right behavior in all cases) > > Perhaps for some reason it'd even fix the issues I reported on Mon, 7 > Sep 2015 22:03:43 +0200, for instance the gpsd experimental package, > Svante, could you check? Will do, bbl!
