From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-io0-f169.google.com (mail-io0-f169.google.com [209.85.223.169]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7325F719C8 for ; Sat, 7 Jan 2017 08:06:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-io0-f169.google.com with SMTP id p127so72808878iop.3 for ; Sat, 07 Jan 2017 00:07:00 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=intel-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=message-id:subject:from:to:cc:date:in-reply-to:references :organization:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=1q7AA5GMLzaCJI8E3qm92sI8PrJb8obPz3S8FiqYB6A=; b=W5iPiD8L93D+pNLJgWWGzJu6mPZLDRd/7zU5S7NG6GPAO19sLU4NvGK7szMxtLXSfO CpKjrPPsK7MUvMLPsOLE3c7CEbtyO5sYD8W/WA2Se9ajEg4Qs+wnabCWljhkOUQg6zv0 dcFD3RwDv2kwBTPBlecQT8Z3jfY77v6369N/rDWXYMN8pb1rj2FVEOgUqYO5ot5vw5Ek +kx7emSUaECaxG3otaV9BZdUEHUbGBB3lXDFHHdVflC9i7o8URnBbMSV3wJg5kxUHlYw wxk8pGN4aqS5oiRRubnPKpAmCsQOy993WxIRUa5mljkN24nyeO8KNkNvCzXhvairfQ7k 5sDg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:date:in-reply-to :references:organization:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=1q7AA5GMLzaCJI8E3qm92sI8PrJb8obPz3S8FiqYB6A=; b=SP5cIi7ZV4gk/fY7OGbYwYcJrvy4a20a1FQmOoj+ghPg6367znRDyzc1eb0XCF4FT2 E7S77q2xzOgxltuc9374yINm5n4rqNKeiZsv5RXwmE73hbSE4oYHvzsvwQ0llh2sfn2h w06qbZqwE3qzDWTLC5U+v83qrf51wpBxgWzmdhM4bg8ZVuQXzOCACUDe1dSnqrS2nmnA sCOGOxGSyd0pf5iVv3sGWxdja5NdNsPDM19SfD1x7qblEaw1voEIF8xHvyEoahuSZnl+ S26Y69jP1E0fzO9RJmBonbsB2zvm6hNRRbg7aHlvX1wkQ3qwRtKpI2W9chUyg4Xcozbx +Dmw== X-Gm-Message-State: AIkVDXLvFwothq2Th2rsZ09bxeqPFjybFbZRQKesmKV5Vgnlj0IUXXP3N2mcqJ5ZD1GP32C+ X-Received: by 10.107.171.4 with SMTP id u4mr60938635ioe.102.1483776420008; Sat, 07 Jan 2017 00:07:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from pohly-mobl1 (p5DE8F82B.dip0.t-ipconnect.de. [93.232.248.43]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id m128sm2843110itm.16.2017.01.07.00.06.57 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sat, 07 Jan 2017 00:06:58 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <1483776414.4383.22.camel@intel.com> From: Patrick Ohly To: Phil Blundell Date: Sat, 07 Jan 2017 09:06:54 +0100 In-Reply-To: <1483737447.4360.180.camel@pbcl.net> References: <1483630732-3560-1-git-send-email-patrick.ohly@intel.com> <1483737447.4360.180.camel@pbcl.net> Organization: Intel GmbH, Dornacher Strasse 1, D-85622 Feldkirchen/Munich X-Mailer: Evolution 3.12.9-1+b1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Cc: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] rootfs-postcommands.bbclass: sort passwd entries X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 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: Sat, 07 Jan 2017 08:07:00 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Fri, 2017-01-06 at 21:17 +0000, Phil Blundell wrote: > On Thu, 2017-01-05 at 16:38 +0100, Patrick Ohly wrote: > > The /etc passwd files in a rootfs consist of the default entries from > > base-passwd plus anything that gets added by preinst scripts or > > extrausers.bbclass. > > > > The execution order of preinst scripts is not perfectly > > deterministic, > > or at least unrelated changes caused it to change in a > > non-deterministic way, resulting in irrelevant changes in the order > > of > > passwd entries. > > > > Such re-ordering is bad for reproducible builds and file-based update > > mechanisms like swupd which work best if changes are as minimal as > > possible. > > > > To achieve that, the files get sorted in a post-processing command, > > enabled by default. > > Won't the numeric UIDs still be non-deterministic, though? If the goal > is reproducible builds then it doesn't sound as though this quite fixes > the problem. Yes, but there's already a solution for that problem: useradd-staticids.bbclass I was assuming that someone who wants identical files is already using that. Should it be mentioned in a comment next to the new feature? -- Best Regards, Patrick Ohly The content of this message is my personal opinion only and although I am an employee of Intel, the statements I make here in no way represent Intel's position on the issue, nor am I authorized to speak on behalf of Intel on this matter.