* [gentoo-dev] Doomsayers needed
@ 2014-11-23 18:47 Michael Orlitzky
2014-11-26 18:43 ` Sergey Popov
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Michael Orlitzky @ 2014-11-23 18:47 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo-dev
We've got a bug in Nagios's `ping` command format detection:
https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=468296
It's easy to reproduce by taking down your "lo" interface, or by
filtering all icmp packets in iptables.
Fortunately, you can override the auto-detection by passing it a magic
string, and that works around the bug:
--with-ping-command="/bin/ping -n -U -w %d -c %d %s"
--with-ping6-command="/bin/ping6 -n -U -w %d -c %d %s"
Those are the formats and executable locations that get detected on my
machine. Can anyone think of a case where hard-coding these (using
$ROOT) would backfire on me?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [gentoo-dev] Doomsayers needed
2014-11-23 18:47 [gentoo-dev] Doomsayers needed Michael Orlitzky
@ 2014-11-26 18:43 ` Sergey Popov
2014-11-26 19:06 ` Michael Orlitzky
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Sergey Popov @ 2014-11-26 18:43 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo-dev
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1061 bytes --]
23.11.2014 21:47, Michael Orlitzky пишет:
> We've got a bug in Nagios's `ping` command format detection:
>
> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=468296
>
> It's easy to reproduce by taking down your "lo" interface, or by
> filtering all icmp packets in iptables.
>
> Fortunately, you can override the auto-detection by passing it a magic
> string, and that works around the bug:
>
> --with-ping-command="/bin/ping -n -U -w %d -c %d %s"
> --with-ping6-command="/bin/ping6 -n -U -w %d -c %d %s"
>
> Those are the formats and executable locations that get detected on my
> machine. Can anyone think of a case where hard-coding these (using
> $ROOT) would backfire on me?
>
Standart - cross-compilation and prefix. If you do not care about the
latter(not having keywords for your package) - it's ok.
Cross-compilation, or compilation into another root is trickier - you
should support it.
--
Best regards, Sergey Popov
Gentoo developer
Gentoo Desktop-effects project lead
Gentoo Proxy maintainers project lead
[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 538 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [gentoo-dev] Doomsayers needed
2014-11-26 18:43 ` Sergey Popov
@ 2014-11-26 19:06 ` Michael Orlitzky
2014-11-26 20:57 ` Diego Elio Pettenò
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Michael Orlitzky @ 2014-11-26 19:06 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo-dev
On 11/26/2014 01:43 PM, Sergey Popov wrote:
>
> Standart - cross-compilation and prefix. If you do not care about the
> latter(not having keywords for your package) - it's ok.
> Cross-compilation, or compilation into another root is trickier - you
> should support it.
>
With ping and ping6 coming from net-misc/iputils, wouldn't the command
syntax be the same under prefix, except with $EROOT instead of $ROOT?
And with the command set to ${ROOT}bin/ping, building for a Gentoo
system under another root should work, right?
Cross-compiling for another system with a different syntax might not
work, of course -- but it didn't before, either. You'd need to use
EXTRA_ECONF for that.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [gentoo-dev] Doomsayers needed
2014-11-26 19:06 ` Michael Orlitzky
@ 2014-11-26 20:57 ` Diego Elio Pettenò
2014-11-26 23:04 ` Michael Orlitzky
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Diego Elio Pettenò @ 2014-11-26 20:57 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo-dev
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 669 bytes --]
On 26 Nov 2014 11:07, "Michael Orlitzky" <mjo@gentoo.org> wrote:
>
> On 11/26/2014 01:43 PM, Sergey Popov wrote:
> >
> > Standart - cross-compilation and prefix. If you do not care about the
> > latter(not having keywords for your package) - it's ok.
> > Cross-compilation, or compilation into another root is trickier - you
> > should support it.
> >
>
> With ping and ping6 coming from net-misc/iputils, wouldn't the command
> syntax be the same under prefix, except with $EROOT instead of $ROOT?
>
> And with the command set to ${ROOT}bin/ping, building for a Gentoo
> system under another root should work, right?
No, $ROOT should not seep into the compiled code.
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 884 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [gentoo-dev] Doomsayers needed
2014-11-26 20:57 ` Diego Elio Pettenò
@ 2014-11-26 23:04 ` Michael Orlitzky
0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Michael Orlitzky @ 2014-11-26 23:04 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo-dev
On 11/26/2014 03:57 PM, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
>>
>> And with the command set to ${ROOT}bin/ping, building for a Gentoo
>> system under another root should work, right?
>
> No, $ROOT should not seep into the compiled code.
>
Ah, I think I see my mistake: when running *within* a chroot, you don't
want ${ROOT}bin/ping, instead you want just /bin/ping. Likewise for
prefix I'd want ${EPREFIX}/bin/ping instead of ${EROOT}bin/ping?
As long as the test suite remains disabled, it shouldn't be a problem to
set them to the values needed at runtime. Thank you both.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2014-11-26 23:04 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2014-11-23 18:47 [gentoo-dev] Doomsayers needed Michael Orlitzky
2014-11-26 18:43 ` Sergey Popov
2014-11-26 19:06 ` Michael Orlitzky
2014-11-26 20:57 ` Diego Elio Pettenò
2014-11-26 23:04 ` Michael Orlitzky
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox