Re: Ownership issue in package contents

[Mario Domenech Goulart <mario@ossystems.com.br>]

Hi Mark,

On Tue, 31 Mar 2015 13:23:00 -0500 Mark Hatle <mark.hatle@windriver.com> wrote:

> On 3/31/15 12:20 PM, Mario Domenech Goulart wrote:
>> 
>> On Tue, 31 Mar 2015 14:50:06 +0100 "Burton, Ross" <ross.burton@intel.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> On 27 March 2015 at 17:31, Mario Domenech Goulart <mario@ossystems.com.br> wrote:
>>>
>>>     Note that, although I run "chown -R foo:foo ${D}${libdir}/foo" in
>>>     the recipe, ./usr/lib/foo/ in the package is owned by root.
>>>     However, its content has the right ownership.
>>>
>>> Looks like a bug in pseudo to me, can you file a bug for that?
>> 
>> Sure.  Filed #7554.
>
> I'd suggest you look at meta/classes/package.bbclass "fixup_perms" function.
>
> The ${D}${libdir} (and above) are "corrected" to be 'root:root' by this
> function.  I don't know why 'foo' would be, but if it's a standard defined
> variable -- or if 'directory walking' is enabled it could end up doing this as well.
>
> The control file for this is in meta/files/fs-perms.txt (unless otherwise
> defined by a distribution or other configuration file.)

Thanks a lot.  You seem to have guided me exactly to what causes the
issue.

>
> Format of the file is:
>
> # The format of this file
> #
> #<path> <mode>  <uid>   <gid>   <walk>  <fmode> <fuid>  <fgid>
...
>
> The default is:
...
> libexecdir	0755 root root false - - -
...

This variable seems to be the cause of problems:

$ bitbake -e foo | grep libexecdir=
export libexecdir="/usr/lib/foo"

As far as I understand, package.bbclass may use a user-configured
permissions table (via FILESYSTEM_PERMS_TABLES), but I'm not sure if
this is the right "fix" for the case in question.  I'd have to hardcode
the owner of /usr/lib/foo to be "foo", but foo may not be available when
packaging other recipes.

Should libexecdir actually be in the `target_path_vars' variable
(package.bbclass)?

Best wishes.
Mario
-- 
http://www.ossystems.com.br