/dev nodes in buildroots Re: x86_64 blocks i386?

[Warren Togami]

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.

(oops, meant to include this paragraph here)
I would highly recommend against using --bind mounts.  Extra mounts are 
more prone to failure, especially in the case of where you are 
recovering from crashes of mach.  Instead the below scheme has *never* 
failed us before.

>>
> 
> 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.
>