From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga07.intel.com (mga07.intel.com [134.134.136.100]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F1D1171AB4 for ; Tue, 18 Apr 2017 10:16:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from orsmga001.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.18]) by orsmga105.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 18 Apr 2017 03:16:57 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.37,218,1488873600"; d="scan'208";a="1120676314" Received: from kanavin-desktop.fi.intel.com (HELO [10.237.68.161]) ([10.237.68.161]) by orsmga001.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 18 Apr 2017 03:16:56 -0700 To: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org, peter.kjellerstedt@axis.com References: <1492159760.19076.10.camel@linuxfoundation.org> <5d709f7eb9fa49fd89cd95818ddf4018@XBOX02.axis.com> From: Alexander Kanavin Message-ID: Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2017 13:16:39 +0300 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <5d709f7eb9fa49fd89cd95818ddf4018@XBOX02.axis.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Allow postinst functions to be verbose 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: Tue, 18 Apr 2017 10:16:58 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 04/14/2017 04:10 PM, Peter Kjellerstedt wrote: >> I'm afraid I can't take these since these scripts get written into the >> sstate objects for the recipes in question and this would make the >> sstate change depending on the parameters you call bitbake with. I >> think we'd both agree that is undesirable. > > Bother. Did not think of that (I am so used to having it enabled in all my > builds). > >> Not sure what we can do but this needs more thought. > > Yeah, it would be great if the output from the postinst scripts was actually > captured. But we can think of that for 2.4. Are you using rpm? If you are, we already have ROOTFS_RPM_DEBUG variable which, if enabled, directs rpm to output a lot more to the log.do_rootfs than it normally would. Can you switch it on in your local.conf and see if you get what you need? If the log still isn't verbose enough, please write a comment to this bug: https://bugzilla.yoctoproject.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11096 explaining what kind of output from rpm would be useful to have, and we can patch rpm to do that. Alex