Virtualized Build environments

[Warren Togami]

On Thu, 2003-08-28 at 03:31, Rik van Riel wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Aug 2003, Warren Togami wrote:
> 
> > Are UML kernels capable of true NPTL build environment internally?
> 
> That's a good question. I guess it'd have to be 2.6 UML and
> even there I'm not quite sure...
> 
> > Have you considered vservers rather than chroot or UML?  Fedora Linux
> > project is currently working on
> 
> I can't believe I forgot about vservers. I've played quite
> a bit with vservers a year or two ago and even patched the
> vserver code a little bit.
> 

http://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=512
Try Enrico's vserver package currently in Fedora QA.  It has bug fixes
on top of the official vserver package, and kills the linuxconf
sub-package.

Don't forget to remove all the device nodes internally by using
install-post.sh within the vserver package.  The device nodes are one
way to break out of the vserver, and technically no packages should
require the device nodes to build properly.  If they do fail to build
with device nodes missing, it is a packaging problem.

> You're absolutely right, I should use vservers for the
> build environments.  UML is more of a thing for testing
> things like MTAs, vserver is better for building...
> 
> > http://sourceforge.net/projects/mach/
> > Try the current CVS snapshot of mach, (grab component mach2 written in
> > python, mach is the old version written in Makefile).  Thomas wrote an
> > excellent framework for auto-creation of build root chroots,
> > auto-dependency resolution, build, collect build logs, etc.
> 
> I haven't learned python yet, but I see I've got a good
> reason to learn it now ... cool.

Help us in conversion of mach from chroot to vserver chroot. =)

http://www.fedora.us/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel
Please consider subscribing to fedora-devel.

Warren