From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 921AFE87841 for ; Tue, 3 Feb 2026 15:37:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-qv1-f47.google.com (mail-qv1-f47.google.com [209.85.219.47]) by mx.groups.io with SMTP id smtpd.msgproc01-g2.19556.1770133062594500590 for ; Tue, 03 Feb 2026 07:37:42 -0800 Authentication-Results: mx.groups.io; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com header.s=20230601 header.b=A8K9EJ99; spf=pass (domain: gmail.com, ip: 209.85.219.47, mailfrom: twoerner@gmail.com) Received: by mail-qv1-f47.google.com with SMTP id 6a1803df08f44-8947e6ffd20so77579266d6.1 for ; Tue, 03 Feb 2026 07:37:42 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1770133061; x=1770737861; darn=lists.openembedded.org; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=uMLApj4ekp08srAOHaVxVlg7DebpAKolyJlc5T3VBTI=; b=A8K9EJ99pFrFPXo5Qk8BRnztms/LoPg3qZn1NIccM5FAvIHhO/wZ0p9F1+VH9WLmEn +KLDt7+U64DJ9EjIcaZePslcvQj7DNsxLCMzhVEtOk+XcVOjvHFpAYBX8YK87JySWLqm iY1F4EJt7nnHiGT7+NqBKlRUGQwkauI0C1ijaL0N+OKrM5sveACkTU1oQrUnoA8bBJWx 40gI/iFN0p7NdWHgd/rOXG5brYfqWO6K4cn5wvDeL+egZYtzhqVH8LNDwZeM3fhvMnsg rSlmt6aTjFeXozNGwjwc5iUuMSHruM5noEMPGQLuv8tkOBiGz7oz6NVr/7EeHkOJc3T1 Rz3A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1770133061; x=1770737861; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-gg:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=uMLApj4ekp08srAOHaVxVlg7DebpAKolyJlc5T3VBTI=; b=CwHaCfYUQDTnT9xlWG6/p6sc+RxYI+lKsaeGrw4EIiyJeWFi90ZsFe8qaVxfgdzXaO DX181+/KA9DSKRrQ+nUXKLvmZMLnxwcfXnEV2ocfXlk3DnPxHRWjuKqoWBlXD0EjQ0zQ gOeWzBaOu8xU4gTApFqJs8q9+eVC1cOaQZFV5KPZR/eWsEHRncm6XNjQC//tgRKkvfdK +I5VzFh6h+k2AQd09LuH2ZPlVCnM+WQv3eq2O8soR28LC+s80MAedxSEhzKFPpN4er3Z Ydy6XLS5Yl/3Sm557x3Jeopmd8dwtoUpAitnQgDvzxfyx+B0owXYx7hFL/u3wWksU/69 JXBQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YzlP38wxwcWKpIFZo+pAJHnwdAuqN4fj+fSSuhqzAnAwdhUz0+f oJFp+mXKGY80VefIvulaFirRKmGZGHBTqK0d6d8Xvw6mu+yW8im1QRaF X-Gm-Gg: AZuq6aIu/5VvU3HAN5QbE8+uvzLDAUqNwF50MZOdKkawI6ucIZRFZ4aR2BRpS2q3dIr ZIhuyZItts5ufuIGpSb6NyF9XJBvVUA5wkngnqZ59gZ6EDXmixX6JX/TMN+rDQXWEZGLSV46USD G9NY7iPG2ghwODT/ET3HQnGIGmXmTEC0y1nH3CiRMjIEbNJSrLwcOW7IytKU3lzoxRz5AZ7A+5t MT744Q40Vtt6ZeBXebl9g1GlpBWTedxgNaffv2pBkIvA2DzTb0rtYggMwnzOUXfxsQzTLszC+KE XLCQD6mAnF8tSzEriPO1iOj4pn0e0UA3np0tAZdmVgHEIVY+YJpxaXPQsoJiPkjWBeJENjHBfbA pcEhjoGR4OxL3doGvOVOuV5FRi2aYAp7UgcoK4iF1od4td7eOyuHatplnsZA24MechbVp1WjW3S lmsHmweysf7jsYO243HeB+HcYRwmSauZzY6fjOovIoMj/KKhwdvmUkS+zcFrO1W/y2 X-Received: by 2002:ac8:5e53:0:b0:4ee:87a:4d10 with SMTP id d75a77b69052e-505d22bb1a3mr200419271cf.78.1770133061494; Tue, 03 Feb 2026 07:37:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (pppoe-209-91-167-254.vianet.ca. [209.91.167.254]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 6a1803df08f44-89521bffb41sm17116d6.4.2026.02.03.07.37.38 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 03 Feb 2026 07:37:40 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2026 10:37:37 -0500 From: Trevor Woerner To: Mathieu Dubois-Briand Cc: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org Subject: Re: [OE-core] [RFC][PATCH v2 0/9] standalone wic Message-ID: References: <20260202170800.4172778-1-twoerner@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: List-Id: X-Webhook-Received: from 45-33-107-173.ip.linodeusercontent.com [45.33.107.173] by aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org with HTTPS for ; Tue, 03 Feb 2026 15:37:46 -0000 X-Groupsio-URL: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/230460 Hi Mathieu, Thanks for giving them a run on the AB. On Tue 2026-02-03 @ 02:56:25 PM, Mathieu Dubois-Briand wrote: > On Mon Feb 2, 2026 at 6:07 PM CET, Trevor Woerner via lists.openembedded.org wrote: > > This series of patches explores the possibility of splitting wic out > > from oe-core into its own standalone utility. The wic utility will > > continue to fall under The Yocto Project umbrella, but will no longer > > be integrated into the project as part of oe-core. The ultimate goal is > > to make wic a completely independent tool, hosted on PyPI, with its own > > tests, development roadmap, and releases. > > > > Some benefits include: > > - relieving the oe-core maintainers from having to review, understand, > > merge, or reject wic patches > > - allow the tool to be used outside of The Yocto Project for generating > > Linux images > > - provide more flexibility to explore other features, libraries, > > mechanisms, etc > > > > The initial task of splitting wic out into its own repository was > > performed with the help of AI. It was checked, and subsequent work was > > done without AI. > > > > These changes have been tested with oe-selftest as follows: > > $ sudo .../layers/openembedded-core/scripts/runqemu-gen-tapdevs 4 > > $ oe-selftest -v -r wic > > > > On my machine my oe-selftest results for an unmodified oe-core give: > > successes=93, skipped=1, failures=0, errors=1 > > with these patches I get: > > successes=91, skipped=1, failures=2, errors=0 > > > > There are 2 tests that need to be fixed, but it would be great to get > > some feedback on this work, and to see what the AB thinks of it so far. > > I have also done some adhoc testing with meta-rockchip and > > meta-raspberrypi. > > > > Should this work eventually make its way to oe-core, it would need to > > be squashed into a single commit otherwise builds will break when only > > partially applied. They have been submitted here in this RFC series > > separately to make review easier. > > > > Hi Trevor, > > Thanks for this series. I ran it on the autobuilder, a few issues (maybe > just a single one actually), but most tests succeed. > > > So first, we have the wic tests, which try to invoke the wic tools > directly. These one entirely failed because wic was not found in the > path at all: > > Running '. ./init-build-env; wic create directdisk -e core-image-sato -o ${BUILDDIR}/tmp/deploy/wic_images/qemux86/directdisk/core-image-sato/' with output to /srv/pokybuild/yocto-worker/wic/build/build/command-1-cmds.log in /srv/pokybuild/yocto-worker/wic/build/build > /bin/bash: line 1: wic: command not found > > https://autobuilder.yoctoproject.org/valkyrie/#/builders/15/builds/3076 > > So I still have to look in depth at your patches, but I suspect, as the > tool is now in a separate git, it can no longer be used just by sourcing > the environment file. > > In the context of the test, this is probably not really an issue, we can > just fix it to have wic tools. But thinking about users, this might be a > bigger issue as it does change a bit the flow if they want to use wic > directly. > > > The second issue is similar: one of the selftests fails as the wic > command was not found: > > 2026-02-03 09:54:38,418 - oe-selftest - INFO - systemd_boot.Systemdboot.test_efi_systemdboot_images_can_be_built (subunit.RemotedTestCase) > 2026-02-03 09:54:38,419 - oe-selftest - INFO - ... FAIL > ... > AssertionError: Command 'wic cp /srv/pokybuild/yocto-worker/oe-selftest-armhost/build/build-st-1720620/tmp/deploy/images/genericx86-64/core-image-minimal-genericx86-64.rootfs.wic:1/EFI/BOOT/bootx64.efi /srv/pokybuild/yocto-worker/oe-selftest-armhost/build/build-st-1720620/tmp/deploy/images/genericx86-64/bootx64.efi -n /srv/pokybuild/yocto-worker/oe-selftest-armhost/build/build-st-1720620/tmp/work/core2-64-poky-linux/wic-tools/1.0/recipe-sysroot-native' returned non-zero exit status 127: > /bin/sh: 1: wic: not found > > https://autobuilder.yoctoproject.org/valkyrie/#/builders/23/builds/3260 > https://autobuilder.yoctoproject.org/valkyrie/#/builders/35/builds/3136 > https://autobuilder.yoctoproject.org/valkyrie/#/builders/48/builds/3034 > > > And so far, that's all. So we might have other issues masked behind > this, but overall it looks pretty good in term of tests. Wow, this is excellent results! successes=619, skipped=43, failures=1, errors=0 successes=642, skipped=20, failures=1, errors=0 successes=644, skipped=18, failures=1, errors=0 In my testing, locally, I had 2 tests that were failing, but the AB only has one :-) The one that is failing on the AB: systemd_boot.Systemdboot.test_efi_systemdboot_images_can_be_built is not one I had tested. Thanks!