1 |
On Mon, 2009-05-18 at 12:13 +0200, Markus Duft wrote: |
2 |
> On Mon, 2009-05-18 at 11:56 +0200, Fabian Groffen wrote: |
3 |
> > On 18-05-2009 10:39:44 +0200, Markus Duft wrote: |
4 |
> > > > Maybe this is something totally different, but doesn't the |
5 |
> > > > eclass/portage somewhere *remove* the executable bit of shared |
6 |
> > > > libraries? |
7 |
> > > |
8 |
> > > hmm. have to look that up, but i guess what you mean is the handling |
9 |
> > > of .la files?. however it is strange because it is the _only_ .so that |
10 |
> > > is not executable. and of course non-executable shared libraries don't |
11 |
> > > work. |
12 |
> > > |
13 |
> > > i'd like to avoid a chmod a+x :) |
14 |
> > |
15 |
> > Please check misc-functions.sh and isolated-functions.sh |
16 |
> > |
17 |
> |
18 |
> mhm, right; /opt/gentoo/usr/lib/portage/bin/misc-functions.sh |
19 |
> (install_qa_check()) does all i want, and the code seems to be |
20 |
> well-written enough to get libintl.so*, and make it executable. however |
21 |
> it doesn't (and as i said, libintl is the only one) :( . |
22 |
> |
23 |
> also it seems portage calls install_qa_check rather unconditionally, so |
24 |
> it shouldn't be the case that any pre_src_install (or any other hook) |
25 |
> makes the call to the function disappear. |
26 |
> |
27 |
> I'll do further investigation. |
28 |
|
29 |
something strange is happening here. at the time the install_qa_check |
30 |
verifies the executable bit on libintl.so.8.0.2, it seems to _be_ |
31 |
executable... but when it gets copied/moved to the final destination, |
32 |
the executable bit gets lost somehow - i can't find an explanation for |
33 |
it right now... any ideas? |
34 |
|
35 |
Cheers, Markus |
36 |
|
37 |
> |
38 |
> Cheers, Markus |
39 |
> |
40 |
> > |
41 |
> |
42 |
> |