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 A70F37732A for ; Wed, 1 Feb 2017 16:02:15 +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 v11G0C2Z003615; Wed, 1 Feb 2017 16:00:12 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 OwXOw07owvUh; Wed, 1 Feb 2017 16:00:12 +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 v11G07Tu003611 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NOT); Wed, 1 Feb 2017 16:00:08 GMT Message-ID: <1485964807.14144.29.camel@linuxfoundation.org> From: Richard Purdie To: Leonardo Sandoval , openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2017 16:00:07 +0000 In-Reply-To: References: <6e39192de91d20d920b9f4982e669874aa659625.1485902097.git.leonardo.sandoval.gonzalez@linux.intel.com> <1485904618.14144.19.camel@linuxfoundation.org> X-Mailer: Evolution 3.18.5.2-0ubuntu3.1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] selftest/buildoptions: use a thinner image to test 'read-only-rootfs' feature 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: Wed, 01 Feb 2017 16:02:18 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On Wed, 2017-02-01 at 09:02 -0600, Leonardo Sandoval wrote: > > On 01/31/2017 05:16 PM, Richard Purdie wrote: > > > > On Tue, 2017-01-31 at 16:50 -0600, > > leonardo.sandoval.gonzalez@linux.intel.com wrote: > > > > > > From: Leonardo Sandoval > > om> > > > > > > The minimal is much faster to build that sato, so use the former > > > to > > > test > > > read-only feature. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Leonardo Sandoval > > x.in > > > tel.com> > > > --- > > >   meta/lib/oeqa/selftest/buildoptions.py | 5 +---- > > >   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 4 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/meta/lib/oeqa/selftest/buildoptions.py > > > b/meta/lib/oeqa/selftest/buildoptions.py > > > index d40eb00..004b2dd 100644 > > > --- a/meta/lib/oeqa/selftest/buildoptions.py > > > +++ b/meta/lib/oeqa/selftest/buildoptions.py > > > @@ -44,11 +44,8 @@ class ImageOptionsTests(oeSelfTest): > > >    > > >       @testcase(1435) > > >       def test_read_only_image(self): > > > -        distro_features = get_bb_var('DISTRO_FEATURES') > > > -        if not ('x11' in distro_features and 'opengl' in > > > distro_features): > > > -            self.skipTest('core-image-sato requires x11 and > > > opengl > > > in distro features') > > >           self.write_config('IMAGE_FEATURES += "read-only- > > > rootfs"') > > > -        bitbake("core-image-sato") > > > +        bitbake("core-image-minimal") > > >           # do_image will fail if there are any pending postinsts > > Whilst this is certainly going to be a touch faster, I believe we > > do > > want to test read only rootfs with a larger image like sato to make > > sure the postinsts really do work with a read only system? > I don't get it. What would make the test different using a larger > image? The large image is more complex, it has more complex post-installs and more utilities using update alternatives. The areas read-only rootfs tends to break is in these areas as for example if certain postinstalls get deferred to "on device at first boot", read-only rootfs breaks. Cheers, Richard