From: Martin Jansa <martin.jansa@gmail.com>
To: Alex Franco <alejandro.franco@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Christopher Larson <clarson@kergoth.com>,
Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer
<openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix recursive mode -st on BUILDDIR setup
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 2015 23:43:04 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150903214304.GA2456@jama> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <55E8A710.6050003@linux.intel.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3627 bytes --]
On Thu, Sep 03, 2015 at 03:01:20PM -0500, Alex Franco wrote:
> Hello Martin, so the error you are seeing is related to the chmodding
> being done in sanity.bbclass, not the chmodding taking place in
> oe-setup-builddir. I am adding a catch and a warning for that, as I
> reproduce your setup so I can also reproduce the OSError.
Thanks.
My point was that even when such setup isn't safe from reasons other
people mentioned, the sanity.bbclass shouldn't fail with OSError
exception.
And as the issue isn't fatal for the build (I was using setup like this
for very long time and haven't noticed host-permissions-contamination
from this yet), then I would prefer just bbwarn instead of bbfatal - in
both cases is should show clear message what's wrong and what user
should do about it instead of OSError and user having to read
sanity.bbclass to see what and why failed.
Regards,
> Alex
>
> On 09/02/2015 07:57 PM, Martin Jansa wrote:
> > Warning informing that chmod failed is better than fatal error
> > preventing me to build anything in that setup with tmpfs.
> >
> > On Wed, Sep 2, 2015 at 11:27 PM, Alex Franco
> > <alejandro.franco@linux.intel.com
> > <mailto:alejandro.franco@linux.intel.com>> wrote:
> >
> > Checking may be the better approach, as warning here would do
> > little more than what the current failure does (informing that
> > chmod failed)
> >
> > Alex Franco
> >
> >
> > On 09/02/2015 01:25 PM, Martin Jansa wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Sep 02, 2015 at 06:51:23PM +0100, Richard Purdie wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 2015-09-02 at 11:36 -0500, Alex Franco wrote:
> >
> > Removing recursive option from chmod -st on BUILDDIR
> > as it would
> > take very long on existing build directories
> >
> > [YOCTO 7669]
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Alex Franco
> > <alejandro.franco@linux.intel.com
> > <mailto:alejandro.franco@linux.intel.com>>
> > ---
> > scripts/oe-setup-builddir | 2 +-
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/scripts/oe-setup-builddir
> > b/scripts/oe-setup-builddir
> > index f5b7e4e..44c7dcc 100755
> > --- a/scripts/oe-setup-builddir
> > +++ b/scripts/oe-setup-builddir
> > @@ -24,7 +24,7 @@ if [ -z "$BUILDDIR" ]; then
> > fi
> > mkdir -p "$BUILDDIR/conf"
> > -chmod -R -st "$BUILDDIR"
> > +chmod -st "$BUILDDIR"
> >
> > I think you did this so that conf/ gets the right
> > permissions too.
> > Perhaps the best approach is:
> >
> > +chmod -st "$BUILDDIR" $BUILDDIR/conf"
> >
> > Can we add "|| bbwarn foo"
> >
> > for cases when it doesn't work for whatever reason or check the
> > permissions of these 2 dirs before calling chmod?
> >
> > ?
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Richard
> >
> > --
> > _______________________________________________
> > Openembedded-core mailing list
> > Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
> > <mailto:Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org>
> > http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
> >
> >
> >
>
--
Martin 'JaMa' Jansa jabber: Martin.Jansa@gmail.com
[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 188 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-09-03 21:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-09-02 16:36 [PATCH] Fix recursive mode -st on BUILDDIR setup Alex Franco
2015-09-02 17:51 ` Richard Purdie
2015-09-02 18:25 ` Martin Jansa
2015-09-02 21:27 ` Alex Franco
2015-09-03 0:57 ` Martin Jansa
2015-09-03 20:01 ` Alex Franco
2015-09-03 21:43 ` Martin Jansa [this message]
2015-09-03 21:54 ` Alex Franco
2015-09-02 21:47 ` Peter Seebach
2015-09-02 22:28 ` Alex Franco
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20150903214304.GA2456@jama \
--to=martin.jansa@gmail.com \
--cc=alejandro.franco@linux.intel.com \
--cc=clarson@kergoth.com \
--cc=openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox