Re: [gentoo-alt] stripping files that are not writable

[Fabian Groffen]

On 02-12-2008 11:12:40 -0600, Jeremy Olexa wrote:
> It has become apparent to me that portage's stripping feature does not
> work if the files are not writeable[1]. Gentoo Linux doesn't notice
> this 'issue' because root can copy over files that are -w. So, that
> leaves us with a few options per-package. I will spell out my ideas
> below:
>
> Idea 1:
> chmod +w in the src_install() phase
> stripping gets called
> chmod -w in pkg_postinstall() phase
>
> Pro's: files are stripped, all is well.
> Con's: Ugly hacks in ebuilds, more diff's compared to gentoo-x86. Have
> to investigate on a per-package basis.
>
> Idea 2:
> Something like: use prefix? && FEATURES=nostrip

that would just be set in the profiles, like it is for almost all
platforms ( :( )

> Pro's: we don't try to alter file permissions. cleaner ebuilds, less
> diffs. Easiest to implement
> Con's: Files are not stripped - Do we care?
>
> Idea 3:
> Implement something in portage to check permissions, alter them, strip
> them, revert permissions.
>
> Pro's: ebuilds are untouched. works without Prefix devs getting
> involved after initial effort. End result is most similar to Gentoo
> Linux
> Con's: expensive, probably more so on the odd archs. man-hours to
> implement & test.
>
> So..thoughts?

Idea 4:
implement Idea 1 or something similar in Portage's sources (prep_strip.sh)

> [1]:
> x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-strip: unable to copy file
> '/public/tmp/linux-64/portage/dev-libs/openssl-0.9.8i/image/home/jolexa/portage/linux-64/usr/lib/libssl.so.0.9.8';
> reason: Permission denied
> % ls -l /public/tmp/linux-64/portage/dev-libs/openssl-0.9.8i/image/home/jolexa/portage/linux-64/usr/lib/libssl.so.0.9.8
> -r-xr-xr-x 1 jolexa minstaff 361857 2008-12-02 11:09
> /public/tmp/linux-64/portage/dev-libs/openssl-0.9.8i/image/home/jolexa/portage/linux-64/usr/lib/libssl.so.0.9.8*


-- 
Fabian Groffen
Gentoo on a different level