* Removing netbase from an image
@ 2012-10-30 10:17 Jack Mitchell
2012-10-30 10:22 ` Burton, Ross
2012-10-30 14:14 ` Otavio Salvador
0 siblings, 2 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Jack Mitchell @ 2012-10-30 10:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer
I am attempting to remove netbase from a custom image. I would like to
replace it with connman. I have added connman through
EXTRA_IMAGE_INSTALL, however netbase is brought in via
packagegroup-core-boot.bb which funnily enough has some very important
features and I would like to keep.
What would be the best way to make this replacement. Should I copy
packagegroup-core-boot.bb and keep a local copy, while keeping it in
sync manually? Alternatively, I notice quite a few packages in
packagegroup-core-boot have a VIRTUAL-RUNTIME_* define. Would it be
worth having a VIRTUAL-RUNTIME_network ?= "netbase" which could be
overridden?
Thoughts?
--
Jack Mitchell (jack@embed.me.uk)
Embedded Systems Engineer
http://www.embed.me.uk
--
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: Removing netbase from an image
2012-10-30 10:17 Removing netbase from an image Jack Mitchell
@ 2012-10-30 10:22 ` Burton, Ross
2012-10-30 14:33 ` Phil Blundell
2012-10-30 14:14 ` Otavio Salvador
1 sibling, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Burton, Ross @ 2012-10-30 10:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ml; +Cc: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer
On 30 October 2012 10:17, Jack Mitchell <ml@communistcode.co.uk> wrote:
> I am attempting to remove netbase from a custom image. I would like to
> replace it with connman. I have added connman through EXTRA_IMAGE_INSTALL,
> however netbase is brought in via packagegroup-core-boot.bb which funnily
> enough has some very important features and I would like to keep.
>
> What would be the best way to make this replacement. Should I copy
> packagegroup-core-boot.bb and keep a local copy, while keeping it in sync
> manually? Alternatively, I notice quite a few packages in
> packagegroup-core-boot have a VIRTUAL-RUNTIME_* define. Would it be worth
> having a VIRTUAL-RUNTIME_network ?= "netbase" which could be overridden?
You don't want to remove netbase, you just want to remove the
/etc/network/interfaces file. The rest of netbase is very important
to have.
Dig on the list and you'll find patches to split that file out but
they didn't get into 1.3. Unless you're working against master and
willing to help get those patches tested and merged, the easy solution
is to use a .bbappend and ship an empty interfaces file
(meta-guacamayo does this if you want prior art).
Ross
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: Removing netbase from an image
2012-10-30 10:17 Removing netbase from an image Jack Mitchell
2012-10-30 10:22 ` Burton, Ross
@ 2012-10-30 14:14 ` Otavio Salvador
1 sibling, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Otavio Salvador @ 2012-10-30 14:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ml; +Cc: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer
On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 8:17 AM, Jack Mitchell <ml@communistcode.co.uk> wrote:
> I am attempting to remove netbase from a custom image. I would like to
> replace it with connman. I have added connman through EXTRA_IMAGE_INSTALL,
> however netbase is brought in via packagegroup-core-boot.bb which funnily
> enough has some very important features and I would like to keep.
>
> What would be the best way to make this replacement. Should I copy
> packagegroup-core-boot.bb and keep a local copy, while keeping it in sync
> manually? Alternatively, I notice quite a few packages in
> packagegroup-core-boot have a VIRTUAL-RUNTIME_* define. Would it be worth
> having a VIRTUAL-RUNTIME_network ?= "netbase" which could be overridden?
>
> Thoughts?
Even though I agree with Ross that you most probably want to override
the interfaces file I think it is nice to be able to override it and
the VIRTUAL-RUNTIME_network-base would be a good addition for it.
--
Otavio Salvador O.S. Systems
E-mail: otavio@ossystems.com.br http://www.ossystems.com.br
Mobile: +55 53 9981-7854 http://projetos.ossystems.com.br
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: Removing netbase from an image
2012-10-30 10:22 ` Burton, Ross
@ 2012-10-30 14:33 ` Phil Blundell
0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Phil Blundell @ 2012-10-30 14:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Burton, Ross; +Cc: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer
On Tue, 2012-10-30 at 10:22 +0000, Burton, Ross wrote:
> You don't want to remove netbase, you just want to remove the
> /etc/network/interfaces file. The rest of netbase is very important
> to have.
Well, FSVO "very important". There's very little in there which is
actually indispensible; /etc/hosts is probably the only file that I'd
consider to be all that important, and arguably it's a libc bug that
this one is necessary. I don't use netbase itself in any of my own
images.
p.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2012-10-30 14:47 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2012-10-30 10:17 Removing netbase from an image Jack Mitchell
2012-10-30 10:22 ` Burton, Ross
2012-10-30 14:33 ` Phil Blundell
2012-10-30 14:14 ` Otavio Salvador
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.