From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mga01.intel.com ([192.55.52.88]) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1TtoJm-00009P-Bj for openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org; Sat, 12 Jan 2013 00:47:22 +0100 Received: from fmsmga001.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.23]) by fmsmga101.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 11 Jan 2013 15:32:05 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.84,455,1355126400"; d="scan'208";a="272905527" Received: from unknown (HELO [10.255.14.194]) ([10.255.14.194]) by fmsmga001.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 11 Jan 2013 15:32:05 -0800 Message-ID: <50F0A0F5.1080301@linux.intel.com> Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 15:32:05 -0800 From: Saul Wold User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/17.0 Thunderbird/17.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ChenQi References: <50EA3BB5.7080103@windriver.com> <50EB82DD.7050808@windriver.com> In-Reply-To: <50EB82DD.7050808@windriver.com> Cc: Zhenfeng.Zhao@windriver.com, Otavio Salvador , 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: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 23:47:25 -0000 X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 23:47:25 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 01/07/2013 06:22 PM, ChenQi wrote: > 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 :) > +1 for creating a *-volatile-conf package instead of having it buried in the image recipe. Sau! > 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 >> >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Openembedded-core mailing list > Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org > http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core > >