From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dan.rpsys.net (5751f4a1.skybroadband.com [87.81.244.161]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A925671A31 for ; Sat, 7 Jan 2017 22:52:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dan.rpsys.net (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-4.1ubuntu1) with ESMTP id v07MqEAm018902; Sat, 7 Jan 2017 22:52:14 GMT Received: from dan.rpsys.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (dan.rpsys.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id Y2ZfwQj7d-as; Sat, 7 Jan 2017 22:52:14 +0000 (GMT) Received: from hex ([192.168.3.34]) (authenticated bits=0) by dan.rpsys.net (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-4.1ubuntu1) with ESMTP id v07Mq80p018896 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NOT); Sat, 7 Jan 2017 22:52:09 GMT Message-ID: <1483829528.4367.142.camel@linuxfoundation.org> From: Richard Purdie To: Patrick Ohly , Phil Blundell Date: Sat, 07 Jan 2017 22:52:08 +0000 In-Reply-To: <1483815653.4383.28.camel@intel.com> References: <1483630732-3560-1-git-send-email-patrick.ohly@intel.com> <1483737447.4360.180.camel@pbcl.net> <1483776414.4383.22.camel@intel.com> <1483783158.4360.182.camel@pbcl.net> <1483815653.4383.28.camel@intel.com> X-Mailer: Evolution 3.18.5.2-0ubuntu3 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 22:52:21 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On Sat, 2017-01-07 at 20:00 +0100, Patrick Ohly wrote: > On Sat, 2017-01-07 at 09:59 +0000, Phil Blundell wrote: > > > > On Sat, 2017-01-07 at 09:06 +0100, Patrick Ohly wrote: > > > > > > > > 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? > > That sounds like a good idea.  And in that case, maybe it would be > > better to sort on uid rather than username?  That would preserve > > the > > "traditional" ordering in the file, i.e. root first. > I had thought about that, but then did not pursue that further > because > it would have made sorting quite a bit more complex (needs to know > about > line content, id not present in each file). > > I can give it a try, though, if that's considered worth some > additional > complexity. I think those functions can be python functions and this might not be too bad to write in python.... Cheers, Richard