[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#787437: apt-get fails to execute under fakeroot or proot



Hi,

Am 01.06.2015 19:54 schrieb "Johannes Schauer" <josch@debian.org>:
>
> Package: apt
> Version: 1.1~exp8
> Severity: minor
>
>
> Hi,
>
> apt-get fails to execute under fakeroot or proot:
>
> $ proot -0 apt-get download 0ad
> E: Method gave invalid 400 URI Failure message: Could not get new groups - getgroups (22: Invalid argument)
>
> $ fakeroot apt-get download 0ad
> E: Method gave invalid 400 URI Failure message: Could not get new groups - getgroups (22: Invalid argument)

thanks for your bug report. This is a relatively new feature, and it seems we did not test this.

>
> >From the source code in apt-pkg/contrib/fileutl.cc I saw that the
> problem should probably go away when setting APT::Sandbox::User to the
> empty string. But neither supplying
>
> -o APT::Sandbox::User ""
>
> or
>
> -o APT::Sandbox::User=""
>
> on the command line seem to work. The former gives the error:
>
> Configuration item specification must have an =<val>
>
> which prompted me to try the latter with the equal sign as a separator
> but that does not seem to be legal.
>
> So there are a number of issues here:
>
>  1. apt-get cannot be called with fakeroot or proot - please make it so
>     that it can "somehow" (either out of the box or by passing a config
>     value like I tried)

A config value seems the safest.

>
>  2. It does not seem to be possible to set empty configuration values
>     from the command line (I resorted to putting it in a file in
>     $APT_CONFIG)

But it does work with the file?

>  3. The error message seems to suggest that there is an equal sign in
>     the command line configuration syntax where there is not.

There is, but it dies not work without a value. You could try setting it to root, I assume it works to setuid 0 under fakeroot. Although, if fakeroot does not replace some of the group calls we use, it might not work either.

>
> Do you want separate bug reports for this? I'm not sure what of this
> even constitutes a bug or a feature.


Reply to: