From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=linux.ibm.com (client-ip=148.163.156.1; helo=mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com; envelope-from=anoo@linux.ibm.com; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.ibm.com Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com [148.163.156.1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4BCNRJ1jl7zDrRx; Fri, 24 Jul 2020 05:57:47 +1000 (AEST) Received: from pps.filterd (m0098396.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 06NJWgaN141255; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 15:57:45 -0400 Received: from pps.reinject (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 32faj3m8ru-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 23 Jul 2020 15:57:44 -0400 Received: from m0098396.ppops.net (m0098396.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by pps.reinject (8.16.0.36/8.16.0.36) with SMTP id 06NJlFfd178959; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 15:57:44 -0400 Received: from ppma01wdc.us.ibm.com (fd.55.37a9.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [169.55.85.253]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 32faj3m8rg-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 23 Jul 2020 15:57:44 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (ppma01wdc.us.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma01wdc.us.ibm.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 06NJnfFW030963; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 19:57:43 GMT Received: from b01cxnp23034.gho.pok.ibm.com (b01cxnp23034.gho.pok.ibm.com [9.57.198.29]) by ppma01wdc.us.ibm.com with ESMTP id 32brq9evf3-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 23 Jul 2020 19:57:43 +0000 Received: from b01ledav005.gho.pok.ibm.com (b01ledav005.gho.pok.ibm.com [9.57.199.110]) by b01cxnp23034.gho.pok.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 06NJvgC555050600 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 23 Jul 2020 19:57:42 GMT Received: from b01ledav005.gho.pok.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3B55AE05F; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 19:57:42 +0000 (GMT) Received: from b01ledav005.gho.pok.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C89EAE062; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 19:57:42 +0000 (GMT) Received: from ltc.linux.ibm.com (unknown [9.16.170.189]) by b01ledav005.gho.pok.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 19:57:42 +0000 (GMT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2020 14:57:42 -0500 From: Adriana Kobylak To: Nancy Yuen Cc: OpenBMC Maillist , openbmc Subject: Re: What do you want in a package manager? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: X-Sender: anoo@linux.ibm.com User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/1.0.1 X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.235, 18.0.687 definitions=2020-07-23_09:2020-07-23, 2020-07-23 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 bulkscore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 clxscore=1011 spamscore=0 adultscore=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 impostorscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2006250000 definitions=main-2007230142 X-BeenThere: openbmc@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Development list for OpenBMC List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2020 19:57:48 -0000 On 2020-07-21 02:57, Nancy Yuen wrote: > I'm looking into package management for BMCs in our fleet. I'm > wondering who else is interested in this, does it make sense for > OpenBMC. What kind of features are important? What kind of package > format (rpm, deb, something else)? > > We have a distributed system dictating versions of software (BIOS, OS, > userspace packages, other firmware) which should be on a particular > machine (based a machine's characteristics like type, owner, etc). So > our use case has the BMC take a list of packages to be installed, > natively installing the packages on the BMC. Something around that area is this new recipe[1] to add a host fw image to the BMC image at build time[2]. It'd be useful to have a manager that would use different recipes to build a final image based on different pieces. > Packages must be signed > and verified during installation. To support the new image file provided by the host fw recipe, the bmc-code-mgmt-repo added the concept of 'optional images'[3] that would allow additional files to be included in the code update tarball and enforce signature verification on them. Maybe that can be used/expanded as we add support for additional packages. > There is also the concept of > deviation checking. If the files for a package or some parts of the > file system deviates from what's expected, it triggers some kind of > repair flow. > > ---------- > Nancy 1. https://github.com/openbmc/meta-phosphor/commit/39b1ff0dcd12f15dc651aa20cb85cdec903cb5de 2. https://gerrit.openbmc-project.xyz/c/openbmc/meta-aspeed/+/34618 3. https://github.com/openbmc/phosphor-bmc-code-mgmt/commit/73609bb51c8c43d471ba373317455d3cbe5c5c32