On Mon, 2019-03-11 at 19:50 +0100, Matthias Klumpp wrote:
Am Mo., 11. März 2019 um 18:47 Uhr schrieb Jeremiah C. Foster jeremiah.foster@puri.sm:
[...]
Re-reading this question the answer should be "no". I'm running Clear Linux on the host, I boot into PureOS via systemd-nspawn. So PureOS is running in a container.
Ah! So, you are running debspawn in a PureOS container created with systemd-nspawn?
Yes, exactly.
That's probably not a good idea, because it means you are nesting containers, as debspawn will create another ephemeral container on its own as well.
I think this is where the problem is as well. pagemap file appears to map process memory usage from virtual to physical. I guess some process is filling it up. Having a container on a container on a host makes the debugging process a bit difficult.
So I guess this behavior might be some kind of bug related to nesting containers (I am actually very surprised that nspawn lets you do that
- I never tried that but always thought that it wouldn't work anyway.
Cheers, Matthias
P.S: Debspawn will probably work on any distribution that has debootstrap, but I don't think anyone has tried that yet.
debootstrap is on my Clear Linux system. I used it to create the PureOS container and for various Debian chroots. The machine itself is quite powerful; 8 core i7-8705G CPU @ 3.10GHz with hyperthreading. It makes for a speedy build machine and I like the Clear Linux use of OStree, but I think I need to move the machine to Debian or, alternatively, use the other build script. There is no substantive difference between the two build approaches is there, I mean aside from environment.
Cheers,
Jeremiah
I welcome VSRE emails. See http://vsre.info/ <-- Interesting. :-)
Am Mo., 11. März 2019 um 20:12 Uhr schrieb Jeremiah C. Foster jeremiah.foster@puri.sm:
[...] debootstrap is on my Clear Linux system. I used it to create the PureOS container and for various Debian chroots. The machine itself is quite powerful; 8 core i7-8705G CPU @ 3.10GHz with hyperthreading. It makes for a speedy build machine and I like the Clear Linux use of OStree, but I think I need to move the machine to Debian or, alternatively, use the other build script. There is no substantive difference between the two build approaches is there, I mean aside from environment.
Yes, that difference can be huge though. And for automation, debspawn is pretty neat. With debootstrap being available on your system, debspawn should run. It will require dpkg on the host for package builds, but not for running arbitrary commands, so if you feel a bit adventurous, just `git clone https://github.com/lkorigin/debspawn.git%60 and run "debspawn.py" straight from the Git repo - no installation needed. You should only need Python3, zstd and debootstrap (but I never ran this on non-Debian, so I don't know for sure whether this will work).
Cheers, Matthias
On Mon, 2019-03-11 at 20:24 +0100, Matthias Klumpp wrote:
Am Mo., 11. März 2019 um 20:12 Uhr schrieb Jeremiah C. Foster jeremiah.foster@puri.sm:
[...] debootstrap is on my Clear Linux system. I used it to create the PureOS container and for various Debian chroots. The machine itself is quite powerful; 8 core i7-8705G CPU @ 3.10GHz with hyperthreading. It makes for a speedy build machine and I like the Clear Linux use of OStree, but I think I need to move the machine to Debian or, alternatively, use the other build script. There is no substantive difference between the two build approaches is there, I mean aside from environment.
Yes, that difference can be huge though. And for automation, debspawn is pretty neat. With debootstrap being available on your system, debspawn should run. It will require dpkg on the host for package builds, but not for running arbitrary commands, so if you feel a bit adventurous, just `git clone https://github.com/lkorigin/debspawn.git%60 and run "debspawn.py" straight from the Git repo - no installation needed. You should only need Python3, zstd and debootstrap (but I never ran this on non-Debian, so I don't know for sure whether this will work).
This is mostly for completeness sake, but it doesn't look like debspawn will work without DPKG on the host system as you said.
$ ./debspawn.py create green Traceback (most recent call last): File "./debspawn.py", line 11, in <module> sys.exit(cli.run(thisfile, sys.argv[1:])) File "/home/jeremiah/GitHub/jeremiah/debspawn/debspawn/cli.py", line 353, in run args.func(args) File "/home/jeremiah/GitHub/jeremiah/debspawn/debspawn/cli.py", line 87, in command_create osbase = OSBase(gconf, options.suite, options.arch, variant=options.variant, base_suite=options.base_suite) File "/home/jeremiah/GitHub/jeremiah/debspawn/debspawn/osbase.py", line 44, in __init__ self._name = self._make_name() File "/home/jeremiah/GitHub/jeremiah/debspawn/debspawn/osbase.py", line 54, in _make_name out, _, ret = safe_run(['dpkg-architecture', '-qDEB_HOST_ARCH']) File "/home/jeremiah/GitHub/jeremiah/debspawn/debspawn/utils/command.py", line 70, in safe_run raise SubprocessError(out, err, ret, cmd) debspawn.utils.command.SubprocessError: ['dpkg-architecture', '- qDEB_HOST_ARCH']: -1 None
I'll stop fooling around with this now since I have a number of Debian based machines with which to build.
Cheers,
Jeremiah
-
Jeremiah C. Foster -
Matthias Klumpp