Question about how to install package without chroot

Fulgurance · Veteran Joined: 15 Feb 2017 Posts: 1216

This way solved my problem definitely, I'm happy of the result

Just one thing left, I need to fix a permission problem.
I think the problem I encounter now is, because the process require sudo to run chroot, the script I run with the process have the privileges as well.

Is it possible to do a chroot as normal user ?
Actually when I call the process, it's like that:

pingtoo · Posted: Mon Jan 02, 2023 5:10 pm Post subject:

Hu · Administrator Joined: 06 Mar 2007 Posts: 21724

Unprivileged users are not permitted to call chroot. To use it, the caller must have the relevant capability in its current user namespace. Therefore, your options are:

Run as root, which absent other configuration tweaks will give you all capabilities.
Run with the specific capability, as pingtoo showed.
Start a user namespace, where you can pretend to be root and thus have the capability within your namespace.

Separately, you only need the capability to call chroot, not to be affected by it afterward. You could call chroot, then step down to a completely unprivileged user before executing the target process. The program /usr/bin/chroot offers command line options to do this, according to chroot --help.

Fulgurance · Veteran Joined: 15 Feb 2017 Posts: 1216

So some news:

First about security design, I try to do my best, because I keep that on my mind. But I try to make something working first, and after improve it. About the security, actually I try my software without any privilege elevation. And all installed dirs have just normal right. I do that to detect if some softwares try to install something somewhere there are not suppose to do.

Now about the bug I had with Libstdc++-Pass2, I found this come from privilege problem definitely.

When my software do a normal chroot like that:

pingtoo · Posted: Tue Jan 03, 2023 7:16 pm Post subject:

Fulgurance,

Usually missing header is due to prior build process failure to generate the missing header, and sometime those failure is due to permission issue, i.e. no read access at directory level or no write access to generate.

I have no seen in terms of system building design that change target destination permission to none-root user. May be there is known reason not to do that, but I don't know since I have not done any of those thing.

Another wild guess, May be you have mismatched version issue? since your build process expend multiple days could it possible you have slightly old version gcc that place file(s) in a versioned path that is not expected by newer version of code?

colo-des · Tux's lil' helper Joined: 20 May 2011 Posts: 97

Hi, I don't quite understand what you're trying to do, but I'm going to comment
what I have been doing with my LFS/BLFS in case what I have seen is useful.

I am a gentoo user since 2008, I want to learn more in depth, so the next step is LFS/BLFS.
From gentoo using chroot I installed LFS/BLFS 11.2. (openbox)
When the versions began to be updated, the problems began, it is humanly impossible to update from
that way, so I set out to find out how to create my own binary packages with an administrator
of packages already made and extensively tested by the community.
I found several, pkgtools from slackware, sspm from Joe Packar, and pkgutils and its prt-get front-end from crux.
I ended up going with crux's pkgutils as it allows you to compile it static so that when you update
the system never breaks me pkgutils.
So far I have created 109 binary packages with pkgmk in a fakeroot environment in LFS/BLFS home
via chroot from gentoo.