[PATCH] busybox/defconfig: Enable options required by LAVA

[PATCH] busybox/defconfig: Enable options required by LAVA

[Carlos Hernandez]

Linaro's Test Framework (LAVA) requires httpd and other options
enabled in busybox. Enable them so LAVA tests can be run on Arago
images.

Signed-off-by: Carlos Hernandez <ceh@ti.com>
---
 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"
 CONFIG_UDPSVD=y
 CONFIG_VCONFIG=y
 CONFIG_WGET=y
-- 
1.9.1

Re: [PATCH] busybox/defconfig: Enable options required by LAVA

[Denys Dmytriyenko]

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.


> Signed-off-by: Carlos Hernandez <ceh@ti.com>
> ---
>  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?

-- 
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

Re: [PATCH] busybox/defconfig: Enable options required by LAVA

[Cooper Jr., Franklin]

> On Feb 5, 2015, at 9:14 AM, Dmytriyenko, Denys <denys@ti.com> 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.
> 
> 
>> Signed-off-by: Carlos Hernandez <ceh@ti.com>
>> ---
>> 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.
> 
> -- 
> 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

Re: [PATCH] busybox/defconfig: Enable options required by LAVA

[Denys Dmytriyenko]

On Thu, Feb 05, 2015 at 10:47:16AM -0500, Cooper Jr., Franklin wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> > On Feb 5, 2015, at 9:14 AM, Dmytriyenko, Denys <denys@ti.com> 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 <ceh@ti.com>
> >> ---
> >> 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

Re: [PATCH] busybox/defconfig: Enable options required by LAVA

[Cooper Jr., Franklin]

> On Feb 5, 2015, at 9:52 AM, Dmytriyenko, Denys <denys@ti.com> wrote:
> 
>> On Thu, Feb 05, 2015 at 10:47:16AM -0500, Cooper Jr., Franklin wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>>> On Feb 5, 2015, at 9:14 AM, Dmytriyenko, Denys <denys@ti.com> 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?
Let me check how we currently use thttpd. I wouldn't mind replacing it with httpd if possible instead of adding a third web server.
> 
> 
>>>> Signed-off-by: Carlos Hernandez <ceh@ti.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> 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.
> 
So it sits indefinitely and assigns ip's whenever it can? If so I would actual prefer that. I still need to check.
> 
>>> 
>>> -- 
>>> 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

Re: [PATCH] busybox/defconfig: Enable options required by LAVA

[Denys Dmytriyenko]

On Thu, Feb 05, 2015 at 10:59:24AM -0500, Cooper Jr., Franklin wrote:
> > On Feb 5, 2015, at 9:52 AM, Dmytriyenko, Denys <denys@ti.com> wrote:
> >> On Thu, Feb 05, 2015 at 10:47:16AM -0500, Cooper Jr., Franklin wrote:
> >>>> On Feb 5, 2015, at 9:14 AM, Dmytriyenko, Denys <denys@ti.com> 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?

> Let me check how we currently use thttpd. I wouldn't mind replacing it with 
> httpd if possible instead of adding a third web server.

I don't believe we actively use thttpd any more. It was added way back to 
Classic Arago to support DVSDK and running cgi scripts as root:

http://arago-project.org/git/?p=arago.git;a=commit;h=f8bf614c85f435f53a78a0151b239341643f6a13

I'd vote to kill it.


> >>>> Signed-off-by: Carlos Hernandez <ceh@ti.com>
> >>>> ---
> >>>> meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/busybox/busybox/defconfig | 12 ++++++------
> >>>> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> >>>> 
> >>>> -# 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.
> > 
> So it sits indefinitely and assigns ip's whenever it can? If so I would 
> actual prefer that. I still need to check.

Yes, it is my understanding that it will keep on pinging the server with 
request-IP periodically in the background, until it gets one.

The current behaviour is it tries 3 times and if it can't get an IP, it exits 
with error.

In both cases, once the IP is acquired, the client has to stay in the 
background for renewing the lease. The difference is the initial acquision.

-- 
Denys

Re: [PATCH] busybox/defconfig: Enable options required by LAVA

[Cooper Jr., Franklin]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dmytriyenko, Denys
> Sent: Thursday, February 05, 2015 10:49 AM
> To: Cooper Jr., Franklin
> Cc: Hernandez, Carlos; meta-arago@arago-project.org
> Subject: Re: [meta-arago] [PATCH] busybox/defconfig: Enable options required
> by LAVA
> 
> On Thu, Feb 05, 2015 at 10:59:24AM -0500, Cooper Jr., Franklin wrote:
> > > On Feb 5, 2015, at 9:52 AM, Dmytriyenko, Denys <denys@ti.com> wrote:
> > >> On Thu, Feb 05, 2015 at 10:47:16AM -0500, Cooper Jr., Franklin wrote:
> > >>>> On Feb 5, 2015, at 9:14 AM, Dmytriyenko, Denys <denys@ti.com>
> 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?
> 
> > Let me check how we currently use thttpd. I wouldn't mind replacing it
> > with httpd if possible instead of adding a third web server.
> 
> I don't believe we actively use thttpd any more. It was added way back to
> Classic Arago to support DVSDK and running cgi scripts as root:
> 
> http://arago-
> project.org/git/?p=arago.git;a=commit;h=f8bf614c85f435f53a78a0151b239341
> 643f6a13
> 
> I'd vote to kill it.
[Franklin] I've wanted to kill it for a while but I was told that customers frequently asked for a very lightweight web server so we kept it there to show it off.
Other than documentation I don't think we refer to thttpd in our sdk.
> 
> 
> > >>>> Signed-off-by: Carlos Hernandez <ceh@ti.com>
> > >>>> ---
> > >>>> meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/busybox/busybox/defconfig | 12
> > >>>> ++++++------
> > >>>> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> > >>>>
> > >>>> -# 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.
> > >
> > So it sits indefinitely and assigns ip's whenever it can? If so I
> > would actual prefer that. I still need to check.
> 
> Yes, it is my understanding that it will keep on pinging the server with request-
> IP periodically in the background, until it gets one.
> 
> The current behaviour is it tries 3 times and if it can't get an IP, it exits with
> error.
> 
> In both cases, once the IP is acquired, the client has to stay in the background
> for renewing the lease. The difference is the initial acquision.
[Franklin] This change will cause problems for one of our scripts. Since we are extremely close to our release I would prefer if we hold off on making this change. Wed of next week would be prefect if yall don't mind waiting. I'll update the scripts at that point to reflect this change.

I don't see a command to manually change this behavior to mimic how it currently works once this change is made. So if such a command/option does exist then I probably can fix the scripts real quick to make that change.
> 
> --
> Denys

Re: [PATCH] busybox/defconfig: Enable options required by LAVA

[Denys Dmytriyenko]

On Thu, Feb 05, 2015 at 12:34:54PM -0500, Cooper Jr., Franklin wrote:
> > > >> 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?
> > 
> > > Let me check how we currently use thttpd. I wouldn't mind replacing it
> > > with httpd if possible instead of adding a third web server.
> > 
> > I don't believe we actively use thttpd any more. It was added way back to
> > Classic Arago to support DVSDK and running cgi scripts as root:
> > 
> > http://arago-
> > project.org/git/?p=arago.git;a=commit;h=f8bf614c85f435f53a78a0151b239341
> > 643f6a13
> > 
> > I'd vote to kill it.

> [Franklin] I've wanted to kill it for a while but I was told that customers 
> frequently asked for a very lightweight web server so we kept it there to 
> show it off. Other than documentation I don't think we refer to thttpd in 
> our sdk.

So, to summarize - we'll kill separate thttpd and enable httpd in busybox.
Also, lighthttpd will stay, as it's used by matrix and is more feature-full


> > > >>>> Signed-off-by: Carlos Hernandez <ceh@ti.com>
> > > >>>> ---
> > > >>>> meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/busybox/busybox/defconfig | 12
> > > >>>> ++++++------
> > > >>>> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> -# 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.
> > > >
> > > So it sits indefinitely and assigns ip's whenever it can? If so I
> > > would actual prefer that. I still need to check.
> > 
> > Yes, it is my understanding that it will keep on pinging the server with request-
> > IP periodically in the background, until it gets one.
> > 
> > The current behaviour is it tries 3 times and if it can't get an IP, it exits with
> > error.
> > 
> > In both cases, once the IP is acquired, the client has to stay in the background
> > for renewing the lease. The difference is the initial acquision.

> [Franklin] This change will cause problems for one of our scripts. Since we 
> are extremely close to our release I would prefer if we hold off on making 
> this change. Wed of next week would be prefect if yall don't mind waiting. 
> I'll update the scripts at that point to reflect this change.
> 
> I don't see a command to manually change this behavior to mimic how it 
> currently works once this change is made. So if such a command/option does 
> exist then I probably can fix the scripts real quick to make that change.

udhcpc should take those flags on the command line as well:
http://git.busybox.net/busybox/tree/networking/udhcp/dhcpc.c#n1147

-- 
Denys

Re: [PATCH] busybox/defconfig: Enable options required by LAVA

[Denys Dmytriyenko]

On Thu, Feb 05, 2015 at 12:58:29PM -0500, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 05, 2015 at 12:34:54PM -0500, Cooper Jr., Franklin wrote:
> > > I don't believe we actively use thttpd any more. It was added way back to
> > > Classic Arago to support DVSDK and running cgi scripts as root:
> > > 
> > > http://arago-
> > > project.org/git/?p=arago.git;a=commit;h=f8bf614c85f435f53a78a0151b239341
> > > 643f6a13
> > > 
> > > I'd vote to kill it.
> 
> > [Franklin] I've wanted to kill it for a while but I was told that customers 
> > frequently asked for a very lightweight web server so we kept it there to 
> > show it off. Other than documentation I don't think we refer to thttpd in 
> > our sdk.
> 
> So, to summarize - we'll kill separate thttpd and enable httpd in busybox.
> Also, lighthttpd will stay, as it's used by matrix and is more feature-full

Any comments?


> > > > >>>> -CONFIG_IFUPDOWN_UDHCPC_CMD_OPTIONS="-R -n"
> > > > >>>> +CONFIG_IFUPDOWN_UDHCPC_CMD_OPTIONS="-R -b"
> > > > >>>
> > > > > 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.
> > > > >
> > > > So it sits indefinitely and assigns ip's whenever it can? If so I
> > > > would actual prefer that. I still need to check.
> > > 
> > > Yes, it is my understanding that it will keep on pinging the server with request-
> > > IP periodically in the background, until it gets one.
> > > 
> > > The current behaviour is it tries 3 times and if it can't get an IP, it exits with
> > > error.
> > > 
> > > In both cases, once the IP is acquired, the client has to stay in the background
> > > for renewing the lease. The difference is the initial acquision.
> 
> > [Franklin] This change will cause problems for one of our scripts. Since we 
> > are extremely close to our release I would prefer if we hold off on making 
> > this change. Wed of next week would be prefect if yall don't mind waiting. 
> > I'll update the scripts at that point to reflect this change.
> > 
> > I don't see a command to manually change this behavior to mimic how it 
> > currently works once this change is made. So if such a command/option does 
> > exist then I probably can fix the scripts real quick to make that change.
> 
> udhcpc should take those flags on the command line as well:
> http://git.busybox.net/busybox/tree/networking/udhcp/dhcpc.c#n1147

Franklin, please confirm we can proceed with this change - did you get a 
chance to test your scripts?

-- 
Denys

Re: [PATCH] busybox/defconfig: Enable options required by LAVA

[Cooper Jr., Franklin]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dmytriyenko, Denys
> Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2015 9:41 AM
> To: Cooper Jr., Franklin
> Cc: meta-arago@arago-project.org
> Subject: Re: [meta-arago] [PATCH] busybox/defconfig: Enable options required
> by LAVA
> 
> On Thu, Feb 05, 2015 at 12:58:29PM -0500, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 05, 2015 at 12:34:54PM -0500, Cooper Jr., Franklin wrote:
> > > > I don't believe we actively use thttpd any more. It was added way
> > > > back to Classic Arago to support DVSDK and running cgi scripts as root:
> > > >
> > > > http://arago-
> > > > project.org/git/?p=arago.git;a=commit;h=f8bf614c85f435f53a78a0151b
> > > > 239341
> > > > 643f6a13
> > > >
> > > > I'd vote to kill it.
> >
> > > [Franklin] I've wanted to kill it for a while but I was told that
> > > customers frequently asked for a very lightweight web server so we
> > > kept it there to show it off. Other than documentation I don't think
> > > we refer to thttpd in our sdk.
> >
> > So, to summarize - we'll kill separate thttpd and enable httpd in busybox.
> > Also, lighthttpd will stay, as it's used by matrix and is more
> > feature-full
> 
> Any comments?
[Franklin] Above is fine
> 
> 
> > > > > >>>> -CONFIG_IFUPDOWN_UDHCPC_CMD_OPTIONS="-R -n"
> > > > > >>>> +CONFIG_IFUPDOWN_UDHCPC_CMD_OPTIONS="-R -b"
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > > 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.
> > > > > >
> > > > > So it sits indefinitely and assigns ip's whenever it can? If so
> > > > > I would actual prefer that. I still need to check.
> > > >
> > > > Yes, it is my understanding that it will keep on pinging the
> > > > server with request- IP periodically in the background, until it gets one.
> > > >
> > > > The current behaviour is it tries 3 times and if it can't get an
> > > > IP, it exits with error.
> > > >
> > > > In both cases, once the IP is acquired, the client has to stay in
> > > > the background for renewing the lease. The difference is the initial
> acquision.
> >
> > > [Franklin] This change will cause problems for one of our scripts.
> > > Since we are extremely close to our release I would prefer if we
> > > hold off on making this change. Wed of next week would be prefect if yall
> don't mind waiting.
> > > I'll update the scripts at that point to reflect this change.
> > >
> > > I don't see a command to manually change this behavior to mimic how
> > > it currently works once this change is made. So if such a
> > > command/option does exist then I probably can fix the scripts real quick to
> make that change.
> >
> > udhcpc should take those flags on the command line as well:
> > http://git.busybox.net/busybox/tree/networking/udhcp/dhcpc.c#n1147
> 
> Franklin, please confirm we can proceed with this change - did you get a
> chance to test your scripts?
[Franklin] My release is out so feel free to make the change.
> 
> --
> Denys