From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from comal.ext.ti.com (comal.ext.ti.com [198.47.26.152]) by arago-project.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6C0D2529A7 for ; Thu, 5 Feb 2015 15:52:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dlelxv90.itg.ti.com ([172.17.2.17]) by comal.ext.ti.com (8.13.7/8.13.7) with ESMTP id t15FqROp016453 for ; Thu, 5 Feb 2015 09:52:27 -0600 Received: from DFLE73.ent.ti.com (dfle73.ent.ti.com [128.247.5.110]) by dlelxv90.itg.ti.com (8.14.3/8.13.8) with ESMTP id t15FqQba006408 for ; Thu, 5 Feb 2015 09:52:26 -0600 Received: from dlep33.itg.ti.com (157.170.170.75) by DFLE73.ent.ti.com (128.247.5.110) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.3.224.2; Thu, 5 Feb 2015 09:52:26 -0600 Received: from localhost (ileax41-snat.itg.ti.com [10.172.224.153]) by dlep33.itg.ti.com (8.14.3/8.13.8) with ESMTP id t15FqQvV029348; Thu, 5 Feb 2015 09:52:26 -0600 Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2015 10:52:25 -0500 From: Denys Dmytriyenko To: "Cooper Jr., Franklin" Message-ID: <20150205155225.GH9943@edge> References: <1423148553-1225-1-git-send-email-ceh@ti.com> <20150205151353.GC9943@edge> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Cc: "meta-arago@arago-project.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH] busybox/defconfig: Enable options required by LAVA X-BeenThere: meta-arago@arago-project.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Arago metadata layer for TI SDKs - OE-Core/Yocto compatible List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2015 15:52:28 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Disposition: inline On Thu, Feb 05, 2015 at 10:47:16AM -0500, Cooper Jr., Franklin wrote: > > > > > On Feb 5, 2015, at 9:14 AM, Dmytriyenko, Denys wrote: > > > >> On Thu, Feb 05, 2015 at 10:02:33AM -0500, Carlos Hernandez wrote: > >> Linaro's Test Framework (LAVA) requires httpd and other options > >> enabled in busybox. Enable them so LAVA tests can be run on Arago > >> images. > > > > Looks good. The only concern I have is below. > > Carlos, > Do we really need another web server? > We have lighttpd and thttpd already. Can either of those be reused > especially thttpd since it's already a light weight web server. I guess this question would need to be directed to LAVA guys. Not sure if their build includes any of those other http servers, hence they enabled the simplest one. We do indeed already have 2 http servers, and yes it would be nice to re-use one of them instead of enabling 3rd one. But the question is - who will validate and, if needed, update corresponding LAVA pieces to work with thttpd? > >> Signed-off-by: Carlos Hernandez > >> --- > >> meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/busybox/busybox/defconfig | 12 ++++++------ > >> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/busybox/busybox/defconfig b/meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/busybox/busybox/defconfig > >> index 2d54b83..e0d6540 100644 > >> --- a/meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/busybox/busybox/defconfig > >> +++ b/meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/busybox/busybox/defconfig > >> @@ -135,8 +135,8 @@ CONFIG_CPIO=y > >> # CONFIG_FEATURE_CPIO_O is not set > >> # CONFIG_FEATURE_CPIO_P is not set > >> # CONFIG_DPKG is not set > >> -# CONFIG_DPKG_DEB is not set > >> -# CONFIG_FEATURE_DPKG_DEB_EXTRACT_ONLY is not set > >> +CONFIG_DPKG_DEB=y > >> +CONFIG_FEATURE_DPKG_DEB_EXTRACT_ONLY=y > >> CONFIG_GUNZIP=y > >> CONFIG_GZIP=y > >> # CONFIG_FEATURE_GZIP_LONG_OPTIONS is not set > >> @@ -154,7 +154,7 @@ CONFIG_FEATURE_TAR_GNU_EXTENSIONS=y > >> # CONFIG_FEATURE_TAR_LONG_OPTIONS is not set > >> # CONFIG_FEATURE_TAR_TO_COMMAND is not set > >> # CONFIG_FEATURE_TAR_UNAME_GNAME is not set > >> -# CONFIG_FEATURE_TAR_NOPRESERVE_TIME is not set > >> +CONFIG_FEATURE_TAR_NOPRESERVE_TIME=y > >> # CONFIG_FEATURE_TAR_SELINUX is not set > >> # CONFIG_UNCOMPRESS is not set > >> # CONFIG_UNLZMA is not set > >> @@ -700,7 +700,7 @@ CONFIG_MICROCOM=y > >> # CONFIG_RFKILL is not set > >> # CONFIG_RUNLEVEL is not set > >> # CONFIG_RX is not set > >> -# CONFIG_SETSID is not set > >> +CONFIG_SETSID=y > >> CONFIG_STRINGS=y > >> # CONFIG_TASKSET is not set > >> # CONFIG_FEATURE_TASKSET_FANCY is not set > >> @@ -744,7 +744,7 @@ CONFIG_FEATURE_BRCTL_SHOW=y > >> # CONFIG_FTPPUT is not set > >> # CONFIG_FEATURE_FTPGETPUT_LONG_OPTIONS is not set > >> CONFIG_HOSTNAME=y > >> -# CONFIG_HTTPD is not set > >> +CONFIG_HTTPD=y > >> # CONFIG_FEATURE_HTTPD_RANGES is not set > >> # CONFIG_FEATURE_HTTPD_USE_SENDFILE is not set > >> # CONFIG_FEATURE_HTTPD_SETUID is not set > >> @@ -845,7 +845,7 @@ CONFIG_UDHCP_DEBUG=0 > >> # CONFIG_FEATURE_UDHCP_8021Q is not set > >> CONFIG_UDHCPC_DEFAULT_SCRIPT="/usr/share/udhcpc/default.script" > >> CONFIG_UDHCPC_SLACK_FOR_BUGGY_SERVERS=80 > >> -CONFIG_IFUPDOWN_UDHCPC_CMD_OPTIONS="-R -n" > >> +CONFIG_IFUPDOWN_UDHCPC_CMD_OPTIONS="-R -b" > > > > This supposedly changes udhcp behavior to go into background when waiting for > > an IP address, if not received right away, instead of exiting with an error. > > I personally don't have an issue with this, but will it affect SDK OOB > > experience in any way? Guys? > I'll double check but why instead of changing the default behavior simply > add &? I'm assuming you will get the same result but won't have to worry > about breaking anything. That's still not the same - with -n flag udhcp will time out soon if not received IP address, while with -b it will go into background and will wait for IP address there. So, if you add & at the end of command with -n it will go into background, but exit soon after, which is not the same. > > > > -- > > Denys > > > > > >> CONFIG_UDPSVD=y > >> CONFIG_VCONFIG=y > >> CONFIG_WGET=y > >> -- > >> 1.9.1 > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> meta-arago mailing list > >> meta-arago@arago-project.org > >> http://arago-project.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/meta-arago > > _______________________________________________ > > meta-arago mailing list > > meta-arago@arago-project.org > > http://arago-project.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/meta-arago