Detlev,
On Aug 23, 2013, at 1:05 AM, Detlev Zundel wrote:
> Hi Larry,
>
>> Thanks to Stefano, I have a modified generic-armv5te core-image-basic
>> with NTP and chkconfig included.
>
> Excellent.
>
>> I am content to leave the NFS client features for the time being, but
>> I do not want any NFS server or RPC ports open. From what I can tell,
>> the nfs-utils package provides the NFS server, as well as the NFS
>> client mount utilities. So, I cannot to any package pruning; I must
>> configure the nfsserver.
>
> If you only want to do NFS mounts, you can include "nfs-utils-client" in
> the image. This does not pull in any server.
That is useful information.
I am trying to customize the core-image-basic rootfs, since it seemed to be
almost exactly what i need. The core-image-basic rootfs recipe include
nfs-utils. Thus, I am limited to disabling the nfsserver service. Is that not
correct? If there is a method to remove nfs-utils and add nfs-utils-client,
that is what I am trying to accomplish.
I just finished a build where I added
meta-eldk/recipes-extras/nfs-utils_1.2.7.bbappend containing one line:
INITSCRIPT_PARAMS = "remove"
I was hoping this would override the INITSCRIPT_PARAMS = "defaults" in
meta/recipes-connectivity/nfs-utils/nfs-utils_1.2.7.bb.
My impression is that a .bbappend is textually appended to its .bb file, which
is then parsed as a single file. I assumed my assignment to INITSCRIPT_PARAMS
would replace the original. However, I see in
tmp/buildhistory/packages/armv5te-linux-gnueabi/nfs-utils/nfs-utils/latest.pkg_postinst
update-rc.d $OPT nfsserver defaults
This is the line I was trying to override, but my plan did not work. (I assume
this script gets called to enable the nfsserver service init scripts in the
rootfs image. I planned to fool it into doing a remove instead.)
I chose this method because I do not think it would be possible to undo the
inherit update-rc.d in meta/recipes-connectivity/nfs-utils/nfs-utils_1.2.7.bb
to avoid running update-rc.d altogether. That would accomplish the same thing
since the nfs-utils do_install_append() creates the nfsserver /etc/init.d
script.
Is this a rational approach? What am I doing wrong? It takes 3 hours for the
build to compete to find out my plan did not work. Am I correct in my
reasoning that a .bb and .bbappend are effectively concatenated, then parsed?
That is what I hoped would happen to use my INITSCRIPT_PARAMS for nfs-utils.
Is there a bitbake command that will show me whether it is using my .bbappend?
Too late to try anything different tonight. Any advice would be appreciated.
Thank you.
> Cheers
> Detlev
>
> --
> Restrict Digital Restrictions Management:
> If you can't copy it - don't buy it
> --
> DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
> HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
> Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-40 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: [email protected]
Larry Baker
US Geological Survey
650-329-5608
[email protected]
_______________________________________________
eldk mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/eldk
