From: Patrick Ohly <patrick.ohly@intel.com>
To: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
Cc: Dmitry Rozhkov <dmitry.rozhkov@intel.com>
Subject: [PATCH 0/1] static IDs bugs and usability
Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2016 11:42:51 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <cover.1469697989.git.patrick.ohly@intel.com> (raw)
In Ostro OS we just started to use useradd-staticids.bbclass. Dynamic
IDs are an error (USERADD_ERROR_DYNAMIC = "error") by default because
warnings probably wouldn't be noticed. I was a bit reluctant to make
this change because Ostro OS is supposed to be customizable, and that
becomes harder when developers also have to define IDs.
But we didn't have a choice because after updating to recent OE-core,
our dynamically assigned IDs started to change randomly between
builds, which (as we learned only because of that change) broke the
swupd update mechanism. Personally I suspect that Python3's
randomization feature is responsible for not getting deterministic
results anymore, but I haven't investigated further.
useradd-staticids.bbclass has a bug which impacts developers when they
edit the table files to fix a warning or error raised by the class:
the cached version of the affected recipe continues to be used and thus
editing the files has no effect. Patch fixing that follows.
There's also a caveat associated with how USERADD_ERROR_DYNAMIC = "error"
is implemented: it marks recipes as "skipped" with an error messages
from useradd-staticids.bbclass. This is not particularly developer-friendly.
For example, when the skipped recipe is deep down in the dependency
chain, then building will fail with rather difficult to understand
"nothing provides..." messages. It does mention eventually that a
recipe was skipped with the right error, so the information is at
least there.
However, it's also possible that a recipe exists in two versions, and
only the one normally picked as default gets skipped. In that case,
the remaining version will get build, i.e. useradd-staticids.bbclass
has the very undesirable effect of silently building something else
than expected instead of aborting the build because of the error.
I've not seen that in practice, though, so I don't know how big of a
problem it is.
The following changes since commit b32d430c3c7dccf3a8d06ab492d648893a05950f:
dpkg: use snapshot.debian.org for SRC_URI (2016-07-26 08:56:08 +0100)
are available in the git repository at:
git://github.com/pohly/openembedded-core static-ids
https://github.com/pohly/openembedded-core/tree/static-ids
Patrick Ohly (1):
useradd-staticids.bbclass: trigger reparsing when table files change
meta/classes/useradd-staticids.bbclass | 13 +++++++++++++
1 file changed, 13 insertions(+)
--
2.1.4
next reply other threads:[~2016-07-28 9:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-07-28 9:42 Patrick Ohly [this message]
2016-07-28 9:43 ` [PATCH 1/1] useradd-staticids.bbclass: trigger reparsing when table files change Patrick Ohly
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=cover.1469697989.git.patrick.ohly@intel.com \
--to=patrick.ohly@intel.com \
--cc=dmitry.rozhkov@intel.com \
--cc=openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox