| 1 |
В Сб, 14/09/2013 в 00:46 +0300, Alex Efros пишет: |
| 2 |
> On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 12:16:20AM +0400, Peter Volkov wrote: |
| 3 |
> > That said I don't think it's worth to have such patch in portage |
| 4 |
> > tree - just apply it locally. |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> Why is that? How such patch may harm anything? |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> --- /opt/VirtualBox/VBox.sh.old 2013-09-14 00:45:13.873137602 +0300 |
| 9 |
> +++ /opt/VirtualBox/VBox.sh 2013-09-14 00:45:17.553137565 +0300 |
| 10 |
> @@ -32,7 +32,7 @@ |
| 11 |
... |
| 12 |
> -elif ! lsmod|grep -q vboxdrv; then |
| 13 |
> +elif [ -r /proc/modules ] && ! lsmod|grep -q vboxdrv; then |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
If /proc/modules is unreadable we don't know if modules are loaded or |
| 16 |
not. In such case it's better to show warning. That said, problem with |
| 17 |
this check is that it should check for functionality virtualbox requires |
| 18 |
(with /dev/vboxdrv) but such change should go upstream. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
-- |
| 21 |
Peter. |
Archives