Thanks for your bug report. I believe you meant ubuntu-base, not ubuntu-core (the snap based one)
How did you test this? This seems to me like you forgot to populate /dev, either statically or by bind mounting the /dev from the host.
The tarball only contains an empty /dev, and the permissions have not changed.
jak@jak-t480s:~/Downloads$ tar tvzf jammy-base-amd64.tar.gz dev drwxr-xr-x root/root 0 2021-12-28 06:01 dev/ jak@jak-t480s:~/Downloads$ tar tvzf focal-base-amd64.tar.gz dev drwxr-xr-x root/root 0 2021-12-28 05:44 dev/
If APT had succeeded *creating* /dev/null as a regular files, all hell would have broken lose, so I am kind of happy that did not happen.
For the record, the reason it fails with EPERM seems to be that it's apt-key that's failing and it's run as the user _apt by apt.
Thanks for your bug report. I believe you meant ubuntu-base, not ubuntu-core (the snap based one)
How did you test this? This seems to me like you forgot to populate /dev, either statically or by bind mounting the /dev from the host.
The tarball only contains an empty /dev, and the permissions have not changed.
jak@jak- t480s:~ /Downloads$ tar tvzf jammy-base- amd64.tar. gz dev t480s:~ /Downloads$ tar tvzf focal-base- amd64.tar. gz dev
drwxr-xr-x root/root 0 2021-12-28 06:01 dev/
jak@jak-
drwxr-xr-x root/root 0 2021-12-28 05:44 dev/
If APT had succeeded *creating* /dev/null as a regular files, all hell would have broken lose, so I am kind of happy that did not happen.
For the record, the reason it fails with EPERM seems to be that it's apt-key that's failing and it's run as the user _apt by apt.