r7859 - in trunk/BOOK: . chapter01 chapter06

M.Canales.es macana at macana-es.com
Mon Nov 27 13:50:20 PST 2006


El Lunes, 27 de Noviembre de 2006 16:02, Dan Nicholson escribió:

> CC'ing alfs-discuss. George, Manuel: It seems that the individual
> package scripts aren't maintaining the shell options used by the
> parent shell. In this case, since "set +h" isn't being inherited by
> the coreutils build, mv is trying to move itself because the shell
> hashing remembers the location of the old mv. Or something like that.
> But you can easily test with the variable SHELLOPTS or $- that nested
> shells won't inherit +h. The scripts need to contain "set +h" or be
> invoked differently.

I don't have issues with the the move of the mv binary in the coreutils build, 
but yes the tests shows that due that now the scripts are launched by a make 
sub-process instead directly by the chroot command (like before to start 
using sudo) +h isn't inherited.

The most simple and fail-safe solution is to add +h to the scripts.

-- 
Manuel Canales Esparcia
Usuario de LFS nº2886:       http://www.linuxfromscratch.org
LFS en castellano: http://www.escomposlinux.org/lfs-es http://www.lfs-es.info
TLDP-ES:                           http://es.tldp.org




More information about the alfs-discuss mailing list