David W Noon <dwnoon@spamtrap.ntlworld.com> wrote:

> Since the name is "/bin/sh", this would indicate a chroot jail on a noexec
> filesystem.

You might be on to something there. I don't know portage that well. I am
a new user of Gentoo, but on my system /tmp, /home, and /var are all
symlinks to subdirectories of /local, which is a noexec filesystem.

That is odd though, because I have managed to emerge other packages on
the same system without any problems, although I am in the early stages of
deployment.

I wonder what is different about telnetd that causes it to error, but
other packages like tree and less build ok. Why didn't they use a
chroot?

Where does portage build the chroot and can I change this?

I'm wondering what to do about the chroot now. I don't really want to
remove the noexec, unless I have to, but at the same time, I don't want
to move the chroot to /usr.

I need to somehow maintain access to the local binaries, rather than
have them copying to a chroot jail. I might be able to do some sort of
loop mount for this, but I haven't tested that.

Another alternative may be to loop mount the chrooted /bin directory,
this time permitting exec on the loop mount, but I have not tested this.

Is there some configuration changes that I can make to portage for that?
or can I switch the chroot off, and possibly use fakeroot instead?

(I'll obvious need to be root to install, but I could do this manually.)

Mark.

--
Mark Hobley,
393 Quinton Road West,
Quinton, BIRMINGHAM.
B32 1QE.