Re: [RFC PATCH 3/3] sstate.bbclass: ensure sstate files are easily shared

[Joshua Lock <josh@linux.intel.com>]

On 09/05/12 17:27, Saul Wold wrote:
> On 05/09/2012 05:22 PM, Joshua Lock wrote:
>> In order to make sstate cache's more easily shared ensure any user of
>> the system has rwx permission by calling chown on sstate files after
>> they're created.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Joshua Lock<josh@linux.intel.com>
>> ---
>> meta/classes/sstate.bbclass | 1 +
>> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/meta/classes/sstate.bbclass b/meta/classes/sstate.bbclass
>> index a8c98e5..6707ecf 100644
>> --- a/meta/classes/sstate.bbclass
>> +++ b/meta/classes/sstate.bbclass
>> @@ -454,6 +454,7 @@ sstate_create_package () {
>> else
>> tar -cz --file=$TFILE --files-from=/dev/null
>> fi
>> + chmod 0777 $TFILE
>> mv $TFILE ${SSTATE_PKG}
>>
>> cd ${WORKDIR}
> Why execute permission, and should it not be restricted to 664 for group
> level write access? Why would multiple users be writing to the same
> sstate file anyways once it's there it could be read-only since a change
> will trigger a new sstate file, not a re-write of the existing one.

For permissions I figured that whichever I went with someone would have 
an alternative suggestion so I went with as indiscriminate as possible 
- that's the main reason this is an RFC.

When I was reproducing the bug and had read-only siginfo file things 
blew up, so I created them writeable, see [1].

Cheers,
Joshua

1. https://bugzilla.yoctoproject.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2041#c9
-- 
Joshua Lock
         Yocto Project
         Intel Open Source Technology Centre