On Sat, Aug 15, 2020 at 5:30 PM Paul Howarth <paul(a)city-fan.org> wrote:
On Sat, 15 Aug 2020 16:28:47 +0200
Fabio Valentini <decathorpe(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> - autoreconf fails because %build needs a newer shell (protobuf):
>
> /usr/bin/autoconf: This script requires a shell more modern than all
> /usr/bin/autoconf: the shells that I found on your system.
> /usr/bin/autoconf: Please tell bug-autoconf(a)gnu.org about your system,
> /usr/bin/autoconf: including any error possibly output before this
> /usr/bin/autoconf: message. Then install a modern shell, or manually
> run /usr/bin/autoconf: the script under such a shell if you do have
> one. autoreconf: /usr/bin/autoconf failed with exit status: 1
>
> - shell not executing stuff in backticks `command foo` but returns
> empty string (tonto):
> `build-classpath foo` # this doesn't work?
>
>
> I'm getting the sinking feeling that RPM scriptlets are broken? Do
> they get run in the wrong shell? sh instead of bash maybe?
>
> I'm grasping at straws here, but all those build failures are starting
> to be really disruptive to the work that I'm actually trying to do ...
I had an issue with a configure script wanting a more modern shell. I
tried running mock with --isolation-simple and it stopped complaining.
Maybe that would help you too?
Paul.
It does! Running mock with --isolation=simple works around the issue.
Looks like the glibc 2.32.9000 snapshot broke systemd-nspawn based
chroots with this change:
- Linux: Use faccessat2 to implement faccessat (bug 18683)
Fabio