Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com Message-Id: <4.3.1.2.20010730124229.02244608@pop.ma.ultranet.com> X-Sender: lhall AT pop DOT ma DOT ultranet DOT com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1 Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2001 12:50:27 -0400 To: Peter Buckley From: "Larry Hall (RFK Partners, Inc)" Subject: Re: chroot and mount question Cc: Noel L Yap , cygwin AT cygwin DOT com In-Reply-To: <3B658BCA.CFE748A3@cportcorp.com> References: <4 DOT 3 DOT 1 DOT 2 DOT 20010730115430 DOT 0226dbb8 AT pop DOT ma DOT ultranet DOT com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Pardon. I don't use the command. Perhaps there's a bug. I personally can't reproduce it because changing my root means it can't find any of the Cygwin tools. As a result, it fails. To me, this seems quite reasonable and I haven't set up any parallel tool directories to explore this further. In any case, if you're sure that your chroot is succeeding and that the resulting toolset that you use is still Cygwin's, you may want to run strace to see if you can see where things go wrong. Larry At 12:31 PM 7/30/2001, Peter Buckley wrote: >This is from the Solaris 8 (pretty sure, they just got upgraded) man >page for chroot- > >"The chroot utility causes command to be executed relative > to newroot. The meaning of any initial slashes (|) in the > path names is changed to newroot for command and any of > its child processes." > >So / should be chroot-ed to /view/view0, and >ls /vobs >is the same as saying >ls /view/view0/vobs. >I can't see it any other way. I mean, if > >chroot /view/view0 >ls /vobs > >gives you >/vob1 > >Then why bother doing a chroot at all? If this is the expected >behavior, why not just forget about doing a chroot- it is a no-op. > >I don't understand- Please explain further, >this looks like chroot is NOT working right. > >Confused, >Peter > >"Larry Hall (RFK Partners, Inc)" wrote: > > > > At 11:32 AM 7/30/2001, Noel L Yap wrote: > > >If I have the following mount structure: > > >d:\cygwin on / type user (binmode) > > >v: on /view type user (binmode) > > >d:\cygwin on /view/nyap-tig-du type user (binmode) > > >v:\nyap-tig-du on /view/nyap-tig-du/vobs type user (binmode) > > > > > >and the following directory structure: > > >/ > > >/cygwin > > >/cygwin/bin > > >/view > > >/view/view0 > > >/view/view0/vobs > > >/view/view0/vobs/vob0 > > >/vobs > > >/vobs/vob1 > > > > > >what should the behaviour of: > > > chroot /view/view0 > > > ls /vobs > > > > > >be? > > > > > >I'm hoping the answer would be: > > > vob0 > > > > > >but what I'm getting is: > > > vob1 > > > > > >Is this correct behaviour (I haven't found any docs on this situation)? > > > > What you document is entirely correct and quite logical AFAICS. Now, if > > you typed "ls vobs" rather than "ls /vobs" and got the same result, that > > would be incorrect I believe. > > > > Larry Hall lhall AT rfk DOT com > > RFK Partners, Inc. http://www.rfk.com > > 118 Washington Street (508) 893-9779 - RFK Office > > Holliston, MA 01746 (508) 893-9889 - FAX > > > > -- > > Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple > > Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html > > Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html > > FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/