From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from owm.eumx.net (eumx.net [91.82.101.43]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B9D9D763A0 for ; Fri, 31 Jul 2015 11:04:59 +0000 (UTC) To: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org References: <55BB1C0F.90508@windriver.com> <2950215.CmNeN3gmTU@peggleto-mobl.ger.corp.intel.com> From: Jack Mitchell Message-ID: <55BB5674.10606@communistcode.co.uk> Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2015 12:05:24 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <2950215.CmNeN3gmTU@peggleto-mobl.ger.corp.intel.com> Subject: Re: meta/lib/oe/rootfs.py: dont' remove any packages by default 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: Fri, 31 Jul 2015 11:05:01 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 31/07/15 11:46, Paul Eggleton wrote: > Hi Robert, > > On Friday 31 July 2015 14:56:15 Robert Yang wrote: >> Currently, the rootfs.py removes base-passwd, shadow, update-rc.d, >> update-alternatives and run-postinsts when package-management not >> in IMAGE_FEATURES, this causes two problems: >> >> 1) This makes we can't install the removed pkgs to rootfs, such as >> IMAGE_INSTALL_append = " shadow", the shadow can't installed (first >> installed, then removed) >> >> 2) The base-passwd has been removed, but the /etc/passwd and /etc/group >> are still existed since they are generated by preinst, this would >> confuse the user, and we can't add a postuninst to remove /etc/passwd >> and /etc/group since they are required when runtime. >> >> I think that we should not remove any pkgs by default, we can add some >> interfaces/ways to let the user decide whether to remove them or any >> other pkgs, for example, add a REMOVE_PACKAGS variable, leave it as NULL >> or only add run-postinsts to it by default. > There is a reason for these not to be there by default when you don't have > runtime package management - the assumption is you won't be adding or removing > any users, thus the binaries that those packages install aren't needed. > > Now, it might be argued that if for example you're using some non-package- > management based application installation mechanism that has per-application > users (Android does this) you will need to add and remove users and therefore > you do still need those tools, in which case we would probably need a > mechanism for preventing the removal of those packages. I'm not sure whether > that would be an IMAGE_FEATURES item (e.g. "user-management"), or perhaps we > just make this code get the value of a variable specifying the list of > packages to remove instead of it being hardcoded as it is now. Either way > though I think the default behaviour does make sense for most people and I > don't think we ought to be changing that part. > > Cheers, > Paul Recently I tried (and failed) to add update-rc.d to my image so I could disable/enable init scripts easily and this explains why. I don't know what to do about it, but I don't have package management however I would like update-rc.d, so I second that something needs to be done to allow exceptions or overrides. Cheers,