Re: Updated installation images for Debian Ports 2019-04-09
On 4/10/19 2:48 PM, Frank Scheiner wrote:
> I tested that change with  in "normal" installation mode and it still
> complains with "permission denied". It works through though, when I make
> "mkhfs-bootstrap.sh" executable. I then tested with a "real" sh locally
> and it behaves the same. It works with just `sh '[...]'` and
> `mkhfs-bootstrap.sh` without execute permissions.
> So I now included a modified change (without ` -c`,) rebased to current
> master of the upstream branch and force pushed it to my feature branch
> on salsa.d.o. The MR is at .
Good that we tested that.
FWIW, I still find the design of gitlab/salsa suboptimal. When I click
your link, I am getting your 4-week-old pull request without all the
> But I actually wonder why `mkhfs-bootstrap.sh` doesn't get installed
> with execute permissions, because the `grub-installer` script retains
> its execute permissions when installed and both have the same
> permissions in the git repo:
Because your patch applied to the local package I created did not add
executable permissions. But relying on these permissions isn't
reliable anyway, so the cleaner way is to add the "sh" prefix.
> ...and I also don't see any specific differences for `grub-installer`
> compared to `mkhfs-bootstrap.sh` in `debian/grub-installer.install`,
> except for the destination path (`/usr/bin` and
> `/usr/lib/grub-installer` respectively).
FWIW, could you rename "mkhfs-bootstrap.sh" to "mk-hfs-bootstrap.sh"
> Any idea where the permissions when installed are actually configured?
You are confusing your git tree with the local package I built.
.''`. John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' : Debian Developer - email@example.com
`. `' Freie Universitaet Berlin - firstname.lastname@example.org
`- GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546 0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913