From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail1.windriver.com ([147.11.146.13]) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1TsP3y-0001JB-Ga for openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org; Tue, 08 Jan 2013 03:37:15 +0100 Received: from ALA-HCA.corp.ad.wrs.com (ala-hca.corp.ad.wrs.com [147.11.189.40]) by mail1.windriver.com (8.14.5/8.14.3) with ESMTP id r082M2bD027545 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Mon, 7 Jan 2013 18:22:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from [128.224.163.154] (128.224.163.154) by ALA-HCA.corp.ad.wrs.com (147.11.189.50) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.2.318.4; Mon, 7 Jan 2013 18:22:02 -0800 Message-ID: <50EB82DD.7050808@windriver.com> Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2013 10:22:21 +0800 From: ChenQi User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/17.0 Thunderbird/17.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Otavio Salvador References: <50EA3BB5.7080103@windriver.com> In-Reply-To: X-Originating-IP: [128.224.163.154] Cc: Zhenfeng.Zhao@windriver.com, Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer Subject: Re: [PATCH V6 6/6] core-image-sato: support read-only rootfs X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2013 02:37:22 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 01/07/2013 06:30 PM, Otavio Salvador wrote: > On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 1:06 AM, ChenQi wrote: >> On 01/07/2013 03:05 AM, Otavio Salvador wrote: >>> On Sun, Jan 6, 2013 at 7:44 AM, wrote: >>>> From: Chen Qi >>>> >>>> Support read-only rootfs by providing a specific conf file for volatile >>>> storage. >>>> >>>> [YOCTO #3406] >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Chen Qi >>> I prefer this solution than the previous one however why you don't use >>> a sato-volatile-conf package to provide this? >> Because the there exists a one-to-one (or almost one-to-one) correspondence >> between the volatile conf file and the specific image. >> >> If there is a 'sato-volatile-conf' package, then there should be a >> 'minimal-volatile-conf', and maybe a 'custom-volatile-conf' if users are >> using a customized image. >> >> So I think it's simpler to let the image recipe provide the conf file. >> The only thing we have to do, when adding read-only rootfs support to some >> image, is to add the conf file to SRC_URI and install it in >> choose_volatile_conf. > The problem of not using a package for it is regarding upgrades; it is > not possible to upgrade the configuration file using the package > manager. I know most systems using the read-only-fs will be small and > do not use a package manager at all but some use cases will do (mine, > in case). Sounds reasonable. I'll think about it :) Thanks, Chen Qi > So I do believe we ought to have a one-to-one correspondence here. > > -- > 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 > >