The correct steps to repeating was actually menu -> Application -> Install from
file...

(NOTE, the below steps were _only_ tested on the X86 side of chinook)

However, meanwhile, a workaround the problem is possible as follows (yes, I
know it's a horrible kludge, but at least it allows me to continue with my
work):
1) AM tries to start /usr/bin/fakeroot (from AM log). This fails in the SDK
because there is no fakeroot there.
Fix with:
cd /usr/bin
ln -s /scratchbox/tools/bin/fakeroot

This allows AM to proceed to at least one step forward (to start the apt-helper
component)

However, this will lead to problems with dpkg when AM will actually decide to
install the selected package. It doesn't run it with fakeroot.

So, in order to complete the horrible kludge:
1) cd /usr/bin
2) mv dpkg dpkg.orig
3) cat > dpkg
#!/bin/sh
fakeroot /scratchbox/devkits/debian-etch/bin/dpkg "$@"
<<Ctrl+D>>
4) chmod +x dpkg

And presto, application manager can now manage applications (installing from
files works, as does all application removal stuff).

More information (just to other people who might want to run AM):
application manager will break on the ARMEL side in 4.0 SDK, so don't even
think using it (it's the infamous qemu-problem). There is a possible fix to
that on the maemo-devel lists. Otherwise the exact same steps need to be
repeated as were done for the X86 side.

Comment 3 Marius Vollmer 2007-11-27 18:11:15 UTC

This is used to work just fine in older versions of the SDK and also works fine
in Sardine by installing fakeroot-net.

Using fakeroot instead of sudo is enough of a concession.  I don't want to put
in further hacks to support the twisted world view of Scratchbox.

The SDK should provide a working fakeroot in /usr/bin/fakeroot.  Installing
"fakeroot-net" used to take care of that.  I'll reassign to the SDK.

(Also, a missing or non-working fakeroot means that the AM won't do anything at
all.  Not being able to install .debs from the menu is only one of the many
things that wont work.)

Comment 4 Terje Bergström 2007-11-28 08:13:31 UTC

AM does not depend on fakeroot-net, and thus fakeroot-net does not get pulled
in to SDK. fakeroot-net is not available in the internal repository.

Comment 5 Marius Vollmer 2007-11-28 12:18:59 UTC

(In reply to comment #4)
> AM does not depend on fakeroot-net, and thus fakeroot-net does not get pulled
> in to SDK. fakeroot-net is not available in the internal repository. 

The dependencies of the AM are made for the device, not the SDK.  (The AM uses
sudo in the real world, not fakeroot, of course).

I could use a dependency like "Depends: fakeroot [i386]" to pull in fakeroot
only on i386, but that is wrong since it is just a coincidence that fakeroot is
needed on the i386 architecture but not on armel.

We can add fakeroot-net to the dependencies of the
hildon-application-framework-dev meta package, tho.

A nice solution might be to make sudo work in Scratchbox.  Or to fix fakeroot
so that "sb-conf --copy fakeroot" or the symlink in the original bug
description is enough.

Comment 6 Terje Bergström 2007-11-28 13:05:49 UTC

(In reply to comment #5)
> I could use a dependency like "Depends: fakeroot [i386]" to pull in fakeroot
> only on i386, but that is wrong since it is just a coincidence that fakeroot is
> needed on the i386 architecture but not on armel.

I guess that would be a problem for anybody who wants to install AM in f.ex.
their PC. So, this would not be a solution.

Enabling sudo in Scratchbox on the other hand sounds like a security hole that
at least I wouldn't like to have in my laptop.

> We can add fakeroot-net to the dependencies of the
> hildon-application-framework-dev meta package, tho.

This would get at least Diablo SDK fixed. The problem is that fakeroot-net is
not available in the internal repository. It only exists in Sardine and Bora.

sudo in the SDK could be a light-weight wrapper for fakeroot. Just fake some of
the cmd line parameter support that most people use with sudo, and internally
call fakeroot.

That way programs that use sudo on the device, would continue working in the
SDK and since real sudo wouldn't be involved, this shouldn't present any
(additional) security issues in the SDK.

As a positive plus, running apt-get install with sudo would feel more natural
in the SDK as well (compared to: fakeroot apt-get install). Although I'm not
sure whether "hiding" fakeroot in this way would be for the better or for the
worse :-).

Comment 9 Terje Bergström 2007-11-28 14:44:02 UTC

Installing fakeroot-net indeed does fix this problem.

Comment 10 Terje Bergström 2007-11-28 14:44:22 UTC

Installing fakeroot-net indeed does fix this problem.

Comment 11 Janne Johansson 2008-04-23 16:21:30 UTC

Fakeroot-net will be included in the Diablo release fixing the problem.