From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga03.intel.com (mga03.intel.com [134.134.136.65]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 88E0671AD9 for ; Fri, 30 Jun 2017 08:39:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from fmsmga001.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.23]) by orsmga103.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 30 Jun 2017 01:39:31 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.40,285,1496127600"; d="scan'208";a="1166542349" Received: from linux.intel.com ([10.54.29.200]) by fmsmga001.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 30 Jun 2017 01:39:30 -0700 Received: from linux.intel.com (vmed.fi.intel.com [10.237.72.38]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by linux.intel.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E44955801BC; Fri, 30 Jun 2017 01:39:29 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2017 11:37:17 +0300 From: Ed Bartosh To: Otavio Salvador Message-ID: <20170630083717.GA788@linux.intel.com> Reply-To: ed.bartosh@linux.intel.com References: <823180ba-066d-747d-8112-a110633a03a8@ossystems.com.br> <20170628073121.GA11425@linux.intel.com> <20170629083942.GA14649@linux.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20170629083942.GA14649@linux.intel.com> Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Cc: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] #11662 - wic should mount /boot 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: Fri, 30 Jun 2017 08:39:30 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 11:39:42AM +0300, Ed Bartosh wrote: > On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 10:32:27AM -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 4:31 AM, Ed Bartosh wrote: > > > On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 05:41:45PM -0300, Fabio Berton wrote: > > >> The last patch I sent is here: > > >> https://patchwork.openembedded.org/patch/139252/ > > >> > > >> We're using this patch internally with Pyro branch. I can rework to > > >> apply on master. > > >> > > >> On 06/27/2017 05:35 PM, Otavio Salvador wrote: > > >> >On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 10:28 AM, Ed Bartosh wrote: > > >> >>The patchset also fixes long standing bug: wic updated fstab > > >> >>inplace in rootfs directory. This causes other tasks working with > > >> >>rootfs directory to produce incorrect results or crash. This is > > >> >>fixed by copying rootfs to the temporary directory before updating > > >> >>fstab. > > >> > > > >> >As you is working on this, please also include Fabio's patch on the > > >> >patchset. It includes a command like option to disable fstab change at > > >> >all. For delta-based updates this is imperative. > > >> > > > >> >Fabio, could you point him the last patch revision? > > >> > > > > > > > Do we really need that? > > > > > > JFYI: Mount point in .wks is an optional field. It makes sense to use it only > > > if partition needs to be mounted on boot. fstab will not be updated > > > unless it's explicitly requested by specifying mount points in .wks > > > > It should have support to not touch it. For images which we intend to > > do delta updates, the content cannot be changed besides the original > > rootfs generation. So yes, we need that. > > I'm not sure I understand this. If you don't want fstab to be changed > you should not specify mount points in .wks > There is only one reason to have mount points in .wks: to make wic to > change /etc/fstab, which you apparently don't want. So, don't specify > mount points and you'll have what you want. > > Having additional option for this looks redundand to me. After thinking a bit more about it I'd propose to have global wic option to avoid rootfs content changes. Not just fstab updates, but any changes. For now this option (--no-rootfs-update ?) should prevent creating images if either mount points are specified or --exclude-path is used in .wks In future if any other rootfs changing functionality is added to wic it must conflict with this option. Does this make sense? -- Regards, Ed