Roland Clobus <rclobus@rclobus.nl> (2025-08-29): > I'm wondering whether the fakeroot package is actually required. > As I wrote in the initial text, I did not need to have fakeroot available, > and could prevent calls to fakeroot by setting the environment variable > ROOTCMD to a space (as an empty value would still set it to 'fakeroot'). > > As I understand it, invoking 'chroot' requires being root (it is in > /usr/sbin), so within the chroot-environment one is already root and > therefore does not need fakeroot on top. > But there might be some scenarios, that I'm unaware of, that invoke the > scripts of the installer differently and therefore the package fakeroot is > indeed a requirement. I'll let Jochen comment on that, who's apparently more familiar with those things than I am. Speaking of which, the initial R³ addition (which is modified by !68) happened by applying a suggestion from Niels. > I'm also wondering whether !68 is still required, given that fakeroot > has been added as a dependency about 2 weeks ago. Is the MR based on > work that started earlier? If you look at timestamps, you'll see there are just a few hours between my commits and Jochen's, so presumably some work was being staged. Cheers, -- Cyril Brulebois (kibi@debian.org) <https://debamax.com/> D-I release manager -- Release team member -- Freelance Consultant
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature