From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga03.intel.com (mga03.intel.com [143.182.124.21]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 948DE6A8BA for ; Thu, 6 Jun 2013 18:09:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from azsmga001.ch.intel.com ([10.2.17.19]) by azsmga101.ch.intel.com with ESMTP; 06 Jun 2013 11:09:09 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.87,816,1363158000"; d="scan'208";a="313322738" Received: from unknown (HELO [10.252.121.210]) ([10.252.121.210]) by azsmga001.ch.intel.com with ESMTP; 06 Jun 2013 11:09:03 -0700 Message-ID: <51B0D03E.8050300@intel.com> Date: Thu, 06 Jun 2013 21:09:02 +0300 From: Laurentiu Palcu User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130510 Thunderbird/17.0.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mark Hatle References: <51B0BC46.6030208@windriver.com> In-Reply-To: <51B0BC46.6030208@windriver.com> Cc: paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com, openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/7] run-postinsts refactoring 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: Thu, 06 Jun 2013 18:09:08 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 06/06/2013 07:43 PM, Mark Hatle wrote: > Comments below.... > > On 6/6/13 2:41 AM, Laurentiu Palcu wrote: >> (cover letter only) >> >> Changes in v2: >> * addressed an RPM issue that happened on AB. Interestingly, it happened only on >> certain distros. Our internal AB (running on Ubuntu server 12.04), didn't show >> any issues. So, what was the problem? We use a scriptlet wrapper to run the >> pre/post install scriptlets. What I missed in the previous patchset was that I >> didn't use the scriptlet wrapper when running the pre/post remove scriptlets >> and the context in which they ran was not correct. Hence, the update-rc.d used >> was the host's... >> * addresses Ross's request to move run-postinsts recipe out of dpkg directory, >> since it's generic now; >> >> Paul, Mark would you please review the RPM changes please? >> >> Thanks, >> Laurentiu >> >> Changes in v1: >> Hi all, >> >> My work at #4484 revealed that the package managers deb/ipk/rpm handle removal >> of PM meta-data (when the PM is not deployed) and the delayed postinstalls >> execution in their own way. Currently we have: >> * run-postinsts (for deb/ipk) and rpm-postinsts (for rpm) for running the delayed >> postinstalls on target when the PM is not part of the image; >> * opkg removes the meta-data and some uneeded packages whilst deb/rpm remove >> only the meta-data; >> * both opkg and deb have no way of running the delayed postinstalls on target, >> if package-management is not part of IMAGE_FEATURES, because the meta-data >> was deleted (and it would have been useless anyway since the PM is not installed); >> >> That being said, this patchset tries to create a more unified solution for all >> PM backends. >> >> rpm-postinsts recipe is replaced by run-postinsts but I'll keep it in oe-core >> for a while (a couple of weeks maybe), just in case the current solution does not >> satisfy the RPM users (I doubt it though). >> >> I did tests with core-image-minimal using sysvinit/systemd and with/without delayed >> postinstalls. The results are as expected. >> >> Thanks, >> Laurentiu >> >> The following changes since commit a62aed41f2d8f874f7ae24d0e5be5dbc66ea2199: >> >> lrzsz: check locale.h in configure (2013-06-04 15:55:46 +0100) >> >> are available in the git repository at: >> >> git://git.yoctoproject.org/poky-contrib lpalcu/run_postinsts_refactor_v2 >> http://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit.cgi/poky-contrib/log/?h=lpalcu/run_postinsts_refactor_v2 >> >> Laurentiu Palcu (7): >> rootfs_*.bbclass: add some helper functions >> image.bbclass: remove unneeded files from the image >> core-image-minimal: do not remove packaging files in the rootfs >> postprocess >> run-postinsts: make it generic >> rootfs_rpm.bbclass: switch to using run-postinsts >> package_rpm.bbclass: handle pre/post remove scriptlets >> rpm: replace rpm-postinsts dependency with run-postinsts >> >> meta/classes/image.bbclass | 33 ++++++++++++++ >> meta/classes/package_rpm.bbclass | 16 ++++--- >> meta/classes/rootfs_deb.bbclass | 23 +++++++++- >> meta/classes/rootfs_ipk.bbclass | 39 ++++++++-------- >> meta/classes/rootfs_rpm.bbclass | 29 ++++++++++-- >> meta/recipes-core/images/core-image-minimal.bb | 2 - >> .../dpkg/run-postinsts/run-postinsts | 36 --------------- >> .../dpkg/run-postinsts/run-postinsts.awk | 30 ------------- >> meta/recipes-devtools/rpm/rpm_5.4.9.bb | 2 +- >> .../run-postinsts/run-postinsts/run-postinsts | 47 ++++++++++++++++++++ >> .../{dpkg => run-postinsts}/run-postinsts_1.0.bb | 7 ++- >> 11 files changed, 159 insertions(+), 105 deletions(-) >> delete mode 100755 meta/recipes-devtools/dpkg/run-postinsts/run-postinsts >> delete mode 100644 meta/recipes-devtools/dpkg/run-postinsts/run-postinsts.awk >> create mode 100755 meta/recipes-devtools/run-postinsts/run-postinsts/run-postinsts >> rename meta/recipes-devtools/{dpkg => run-postinsts}/run-postinsts_1.0.bb (68%) >> > >> +rootfs_remove_unneeded () { >> + if ${@base_contains("IMAGE_FEATURES", "package-management", "false", "true", d)}; then >> + if [ -z "$(delayed_postinsts)" ]; then >> + # All packages were successfully configured. >> + # update-rc.d, base-passwd, run-postinsts are no further use, remove them now >> + remove_run_postinsts=false >> + if [ -e ${IMAGE_ROOTFS}${sysconfdir}/init.d/run-postinsts ]; then >> + remove_run_postinsts=true >> + fi >> + rootfs_remove_packages update-rc.d base-passwd ${ROOTFS_BOOTSTRAP_INSTALL} >> + >> + # Need to remove rc.d files for run-postinsts by hand since opkg won't >> + # call postrm scripts in offline root mode. >> + if $remove_run_postinsts; then >> + update-rc.d -f -r ${IMAGE_ROOTFS} run-postinsts remove >> + fi > > The above runs unconditionally for all package types. Will this cause an issue > w/ RPM or deb? (I don't think it will, but I'm slightly worried about RPM and > it's removal scripts.) I believe I missed to remove the opkg from the comment since I pasted this piece of code from rootfs_ipk.bbclass. However, during my tests, I saw no issues with rpm/deb. Is there anything in particular you think I should check for RPM to rule out your concerns? Thanks, Laurentiu > >> + else >> + # Some packages were not successfully configured, save them only >> + # if we have run-postinsts script present. Otherwise, they're >> + # useless >> + if [ -e ${IMAGE_ROOTFS}${sysconfdir}/init.d/run-postinsts ]; then >> + save_postinsts >> + fi >> + fi >> + >> + # Since no package manager is present in the image the metadata is not needed >> + remove_packaging_data_files >> + fi >> +} >> + > > Everything else looks fine. > > Reviewed-by: Mark Hatle >