Summary: | evince-0.4.0-r2 ebuild violates sandbox | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Gentoo Linux | Reporter: | Rumi Szabolcs <rumi> |
Component: | [OLD] GNOME | Assignee: | Gentoo Linux Gnome Desktop Team <gnome> |
Status: | RESOLVED DUPLICATE | ||
Severity: | blocker | ||
Priority: | High | ||
Version: | unspecified | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Package list: | Runtime testing required: | --- |
Description
Rumi Szabolcs
2005-10-18 22:34:06 UTC
Ooooops... Now I noticed that there were strange things at the start
of the build already:
>>> Unpacking source...
>>> Unpacking evince-0.4.0.tar.bz2 to /usr/src/tmp/portage/evince-0.4.0-r2/work
* Applying evince-0.4.0-t1lib_is_t1.patch ...
[ ok ] * Applying
evince-0.4.0-display-menu.patch ...
[ ok ] * Applying
evince-0.4.0-no-tiff.patch ...
[ ok ] * Fixing OMF Makefiles...
[ ok ]>>> Source unpacked.
* Running elibtoolize in: evince-0.4.0
* Applying portage-1.2.0.patch ...
* Applying max_cmd_len-1.5.0.patch ...
* Applying sed-1.5.6.patch ...
* econf: updating evince-0.4.0/config.sub with /usr/share/gnuconfig/config.sub
ACCESS DENIED open_wr:
/usr/src/tmp/portage/evince-0.4.0-r2/work/evince-0.4.0/config.sub
cp: cannot create regular file
`/usr/src/tmp/portage/evince-0.4.0-r2/work/evince-0.4.0/config.sub': Permission
denied
./configure --prefix=/usr --host=i686-pc-linux-gnu --mandir=/usr/share/man
--infodir=/usr/share/info --datadir=/usr/share --sysconfdir=/etc
--localstatedir=/var/lib --build=i686-pc-linux-gnu --disable-dvi --disable-t1lib
--disable-dbus --enable-tiff --disable-nautilus --disable-deprecated
--disable-dvi --disable-t1lib --disable-dbus --enable-tiff --disable-nautilus
--disable-deprecated --disable-dvi --disable-t1lib --disable-dbus --enable-tiff
--disable-nautilus --disable-deprecated --disable-gtk-doc
The /usr/src/tmp filesystem is not full and the permissions are OK,
all other ebuilds work.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 100972 *** (In reply to comment #2) > > *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 100972 *** Why do you think it is a duplicate of that one? That is a different error that is said to be resolved in 0.4.0 while this is an error in 0.4.0-r2 that still exists... |