From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailout4.zoneedit.com (mailout4.zoneedit.com [64.68.198.64]) by mx.groups.io with SMTP id smtpd.web12.3547.1588883404897382545 for ; Thu, 07 May 2020 13:30:05 -0700 Authentication-Results: mx.groups.io; dkim=missing; spf=none, err=permanent DNS error (domain: denix.org, ip: 64.68.198.64, mailfrom: denis@denix.org) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailout4.zoneedit.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C3A940C6E; Thu, 7 May 2020 20:30:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mailout4.zoneedit.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (zmo14-pco.easydns.vpn [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id mex2K0Ov6DYw; Thu, 7 May 2020 20:30:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.denix.org (pool-100-15-86-127.washdc.fios.verizon.net [100.15.86.127]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mailout4.zoneedit.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BCFC140C6C; Thu, 7 May 2020 20:29:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail.denix.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 6ED731730E6; Thu, 7 May 2020 16:29:59 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 7 May 2020 16:29:59 -0400 From: "Denys Dmytriyenko" To: Khem Raj Cc: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org, Ovidiu Panait Subject: Re: [OE-core] [PATCH 1/2] populate_sdk_base: Add ld.so.conf for nativesdk-binutils Message-ID: <20200507202959.GE11927@denix.org> References: <20200428125747.27422-1-ovidiu.panait@windriver.com> <01ab6569-2e2e-1569-d3be-930f4a6037d7@gmail.com> <20200507195709.GD11927@denix.org> <32b9edf2-a77a-65d5-8c1e-e7cb03a7d29a@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <32b9edf2-a77a-65d5-8c1e-e7cb03a7d29a@gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Thu, May 07, 2020 at 01:20:40PM -0700, Khem Raj wrote: > > > On 5/7/20 12:57 PM, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote: > > On Thu, May 07, 2020 at 12:44:15PM -0700, Khem Raj wrote: > >> > >> > >> On 5/3/20 3:51 PM, Steve Sakoman wrote: > >>> Should I consider these two patches for dunfell LTS? > >>> > >> > >> Yes I think they are fixing a problem and are safe. > > > > I don't think it is safe though! > > > > The code has been moved to create_sdk_files() which is a POSTPROCESS command > > for SDK creation. What if SDK already provides own /etc/ld.so.conf? The code > > just simply overwrites it. > > > > but are there such usecases ? looking closely if SDK is extending the > ld.so.conf then they should be appending to it instead of overwriting > and same is true for this patch for master. Exactly my point - should probably append, not overwrite. As of usecases - I can think of a non-standard nativesdk tool that adjusts /etc/ld.so.conf during install... -- Denys