Re: [PATCHv2 1/2] postinst-intercept: New recipe to include postinstall intercepts in nativesdk

["David Nyström" <david.c.nystrom@gmail.com>]

On ons 22 jan 2014 19:11:21, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 4:02 PM, David Nyström
> <david.c.nystrom@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On ons 22 jan 2014 16:47:06, Otavio Salvador wrote:
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 1:08 PM, David Nyström
>>> <david.c.nystrom@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Adding ability to use postinstalls intercepts in the nativesdk env, and
>>>> making sure the correlate between repo + SDK.
>>>>
>>>> This to enable rootfs generation from a package repository using only a
>>>> package repository and the toolchain tarball.
>>>>
>>>> See https://github.com/nysan/rootfs-sandbox for examples.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: David Nyström <david.nystrom@enea.com>
>>>
>>>
>>> Much better. Thanks.
>>>
>>> Reviewed-by: Otavio Salvador <otavio@ossystems.com.br>
>>>
>>> Regarding the rootfs-sandbox, how are you intending to proper
>>> integrate it with the toolchain?
>>>
>>
>> Search the oe-core list for the previous discussions with Tom Zanussi.
>> I believe the long term goals is to redo rootfs_*.bbclass in python, and let
>> both bitbake and MIC(WIC) use
>> the same code for image creation.(SDK env + bitbake env.)
>>
>> I'm fine with continued dev/inclusion of rootfs-sandbox, but I think that
>> might not be acceptable as a long term solution since
>> it may be maintenance heavy, since it uses alot of oe-core internal env.
>> vars.
>>
>> Possible routes are:
>> 1. Use common code for rootfs assembly. (WIC)
>> 2. Cleanup env. var. usage in postinstall hooks, and be aggressive in
>> denying new additions. (Continue dev. on rootfs-sandbox)
>>
>> Off-topic:
>> With above patches, I'm down to 1 postinstall failures for
>> packagegroup-core-lsb:
>> 1. missing shlibsign, (nss), cant get the damn thing to compile for
>> nativesdk yet.
>>
>> There are 2 other failures as well, but they fail when bitbake:ing as well.
>> Only works well with ipk sofar.
>
> So I think we ought to work on this in a layer and put things in
> OE-Core when it is ready.
>
> What do you think?
>

Sorry, read your mail again, I think I misunderstood.
For rootfs-sandbox I agree, this is WIP.

I suspect that others already have these features, and regardless of 
WIC or rootfs-sandbox or other.
they will need the same functionality exposed in the SDK.
We are working on the same thing here, and as such, I think the small 
pieces needed to do this should be centralized in oe-core so
we can cooperate around them, and define interfaces between the SDK and 
bitbake env in an open environment.

Br,
David