From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mga14.intel.com ([143.182.124.37]) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1SSJza-00011s-GP for openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org; Thu, 10 May 2012 05:24:40 +0200 Received: from azsmga002.ch.intel.com ([10.2.17.35]) by azsmga102.ch.intel.com with ESMTP; 09 May 2012 20:14:43 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.71,315,1320652800"; d="scan'208";a="98361589" Received: from unknown (HELO [10.255.13.48]) ([10.255.13.48]) by AZSMGA002.ch.intel.com with ESMTP; 09 May 2012 20:14:43 -0700 Message-ID: <4FAB32A2.1020508@linux.intel.com> Date: Wed, 09 May 2012 20:14:42 -0700 From: Joshua Lock User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:12.0) Gecko/20120430 Thunderbird/12.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org References: <4FAB145D.4080001@linux.intel.com> <4FAB28B5.106@linux.intel.com> <4FAB31B6.1090307@linux.intel.com> In-Reply-To: <4FAB31B6.1090307@linux.intel.com> Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] Shared state for all ! X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Reply-To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 03:24:40 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 09/05/12 20:10, Joshua Lock wrote: > On 09/05/12 19:32, Joshua Lock wrote: >> On 09/05/12 19:15, Chris Larson wrote: >>> On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 6:05 PM, Joshua Lock wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> On 09/05/12 17:50, Chris Larson wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 5:22 PM, Joshua Lock >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> In Yocto #2041[2] Mark reported an issue with reusing shared state >>>>>> as a >>>>>> different user on the same machine. >>>>>> >>>>>> Since the whole purpose of shared state is that it be shared I >>>>>> decided to >>>>>> dig >>>>>> into this issue. I wanted to at least be able to use the shared-state >>>>>> cache of >>>>>> a different user without error, even if all of the objects aren't >>>>>> actually used >>>>>> (i.e. native, at least on the Edison branch I did most of the testing >>>>>> with). >>>>>> >>>>>> This is an RFC mainly because it changes the permissions of created >>>>>> directories, >>>>>> sstate files and siginfo files from what they have traditionally >>>>>> been. >>>>>> >>>>>> There is more of the rhyme an reason in the patch commit headers and >>>>>> comments >>>>>> but tl;dr bb.mkdirhier directories will be 0777 (rwxrwxrwx) with this >>>>>> patch, as >>>>>> will all of the contents of sstate-cache (siginfo and tgz) files. >>>>>> >>>>>> This is actually what one would expect from reading the Python API >>>>>> docs >>>>>> for >>>>>> os.makedirs "The default mode is 0777 (octal)."[1] but not what >>>>>> actually >>>>>> happens >>>>>> on most modern Linux systems thanks to umask. >>>>>> >>>>>> Please review the following changes for suitability for inclusion. >>>>>> If you >>>>>> have >>>>>> any objections or suggestions for improvement, please respond to the >>>>>> patches. If >>>>>> you agree with the changes, please provide your Acked-by. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> 777 seems questionable to me, personally. Generally collaboration >>>>> happens amongst folks within a group, and chmod g+s makes that easier. >>>>> I'd expect 775 to be a more sane value, myself. >>>> >>>> >>>> Do you mean for bb.mkdirhier calls, the tgz files, the siginfo files or >>>> everything? >>>> >>>> I went with 777 for mkdirhier as that's the default of os.makedirs >>>> before >>>> umask is involved. I would likely have picked rw-rw-r-- (664) if I >>>> weren't >>>> trying to request comments. >>> >>> Gotcha. >>> >>> I'm concerned about the behavior change and potential implications of >>> changing the default behavior of mkdirhier. I'm inclined to say that >>> when you don't pass mode, let it use the current behavior of obeying >>> the umask. >> >> An earlier version of the series did this and I'm happy to add that >> behaviour back in. >> >> If we're not going to do that, and want to change the >>> default behavior, then I think 777 is the wrong/questionable default. >>> Beyond that, 777 is certainly the wrong mode to be using for the >>> shared state package in sstate.bbclass. >> >> Do you have a strong preference on 664 vs. 775 ? > > I'm leaning towards 664 (rw-rw-r--) for the files and 775 (rwxrwxr-x) > for directories, these are the defaults for file and directory creation > on Ubuntu 12.04 and Fedora 16. At which point, the obvious "solution" to the bug report is a sanity check whether the user can read and write to the sstate directory. Cheers, Joshua -- Joshua Lock Yocto Project Intel Open Source Technology Centre