Subject: libg++-2.7.2.deb is old?

From: Amos Shapira <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 10 Sep 1996 16:38:45 +0300

Hello,

In order to test a local copy of buzz-fixed before burning it on a
CD-ROM, we tried to run "dpkg --root=... --unpack", just to see if the
files aren't corrupted.

We got some results we don't understand completly:

1. Most packages finished fine, they produced output like:

(Reading database ... 3368 files and directories currently installed.)
Preparing to replace CGI-modules (using .../devel/CGI-modules_2.75-3.deb) ...
Unpacking replacement CGI-modules ...
Selecting previously deselected package aout-binutils.
Unpacking aout-binutils (from .../aout-binutils_2.5.2-11.deb) ...
Selecting previously deselected package aout-gcc.
Unpacking aout-gcc (from .../devel/aout-gcc_2.6.3-13.deb) ...

and so on.  So I assume it means I'm more-or-less on the right
track.

2. some packages produced the following output:

Selecting previously deselected package perl.
Unpacking perl (from .../devel/perl_5.003-2.deb) ...
dpkg (subprocess): unable to execute new pre-installation script: No such
file or directory
dpkg: error processing yigal/debian/buzz-fixed/binary-i386/devel/perl_5.0
03-2.deb (--unpack):
 subprocess pre-installation script returned error exit status 2

(I've cut a couple of lines to fit to the mail message).

Notice that the system-level error is "No such file or directory".
When run without the --root option, it installs fine.

In addition, libg++ in particular seems to be still in old .deb format
(0.93).

I've updated the dpkg I use to be 1.2.14elf, from buzz-fixed.

Can anyone explain me what I'm doing wrong?

Thanks,

--Amos

---

From: [email-masked] (Bruce Perens)
Date: Tue, 10 Sep 96 12:34 PDT

Me:
> It's complaining that it can't find the interpreter for the
> pre-installation script in the perl package.

From: Amos Shapira <[email-masked]>
> Which interpreter?  When I run "dpkg -I" on the perl package I see only
> #!/bin/sh scripts.  And if it's missing (whatever it is) then what should
> I do to install it?

It's expecting to be able to run the shell on that partition in a "chroot"
context - this requires all of the shared libraries needed to start the
shell, etc. Try something like this (assuming the test partition is on
scratch):

	cd /scratch
	chroot /scratch bin/sh

If that doesn't work, you should be able to figure out why. This may
indicate a bug in dpkg's --root flag if that _does_ work. I have a
vague memory of something like this happening before. The _current
directory_ before you run it may be important - try to cd to /scratch
before running it.

> Isn't it possible to supply a "usable" base tree?  Why can't a fully
> configured tree be provided?

The only stuff that isn't configured is stuff like the host name, the
resolver configuration, the network configuration, and the mount table:
all things that require some user input.

> I might be totally wrong here, but I'd like to test things by manually
> installing whatever is need to be done, rather than let dselect and
> the boot disks do their magic behind my back.  I think I'd just feel
> more comfortable with the resulting image if I knew what actually is
> happening in there.

That is indeed prudent. I think you have to learn all of the "magic" that
they do so that you can duplicate it manually. Install the boot-floppies
package and read the scripts under /usr/src/boot-floppies . If you don't
have time for this, create a CD-writable pre-master, and go through the
entire installation process with it (magic and all). Then you can come back
and learn the magic later on.

>> The libg++ doesn't compile with the ELF libc. That's why it's in that
>> state. I'm not sure what's happening with this - whether there is a
>> maintainer working on it or if we're just going to wait for GNU LIBC 6.

> I understand.  But what's the difference between the "--root=..."
> environment and without that would cause such a message?

Presence of the a.out libraries in /scratch?

I think once you walk through the way I build base1_1.tgz in the
boot-floppies package this will make more sense.

	Thanks

	Bruce