Hi, On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 04:56:56PM +0100, Patrick Ohly wrote: > On Wed, 2016-11-23 at 15:22 +0200, Ed Bartosh wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 02:08:28PM +0100, Kristian Amlie wrote: > > > On 23/11/16 13:08, Ed Bartosh wrote: > > > > On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 12:54:52PM +0100, Kristian Amlie wrote: > > > > [...] > > > > This can be done by extending existing rootfs plugin. It should be able > > > > to do 2 things: > > > > > > > > - populate content of one rootfs directory to the partition. We can > > > > extend syntax of --rootfs-dir parameter to specify optional directory > > > > path to use > > > > > > > > - exclude rootfs directories when populating partitions. I'd propose to > > > > introduce --exclude-dirs wks parser option to handle this. > > > > > > > > Example of wks file with proposed new options: > > > > part / --source rootfs --rootfs-dir=core-image-minimal > > > > --ondisk sda --fstype=ext4 --label root --align 1024 --exclude-dirs > > > > data --exclude-dirs home > > > > part /data --source rootfs --rootfs-dir=core-image-minimal:/home > > > > --ondisk sda --fstype=ext4 --label data --align 1024 > > > > part /home --source rootfs --rootfs-dir=core-image-minimal:/data > > > > --ondisk sda --fstype=ext4 --label data --align 1024 > > > > > > > > Does this make sense? > > > > > > Looks good. The only thing I would question is that, in the interest of > > > reducing redundancy, maybe we should omit --exclude-dirs and have wic > > > figure this out by combining all the entries, since "--exclude-dirs > > > <dir>" and the corresponding "part <dir>" will almost always come in > > > pairs. Possibly we could mark the "/" partition with one single > > > --no-overlapping-dirs to force wic to make this consideration. Or do you > > > think that's too magical? > > > > > Tt's quite implicit from my point of view. However, if people like it we > > can implement it this way. > > I prefer the explicit --exclude-dirs. It's less surprising and perhaps > there are usages for having the same content in different partitions > (redundancy, factory reset, etc.). > > Excluding only the directory content but not the actual directory is > indeed a good point. I'm a bit undecided. When excluding only the > directory content, there's no way of building a rootfs without that > mount point, if that's desired. OTOH, when excluding also the directory, > the data would have to be staged under a different path in the rootfs > and the mount point would have to be a separate, empty directory. > > I'm leaning towards excluding the directory content and keeping the > directory.
what about having both possibilities by leaning against the syntax that rsync uses to specify if a whole source directory or only it's contents shall be synced to some destination site (see [1])? In analogy to this to exclude only the contents of the directory named 'data' you would use --exclude-dirs data/ but to additionally exclude the dir itself as well it would read --exclude-dirs data Best regards Ulrich [1] http://man.cx/rsync(1)#heading6 -- Pengutronix e.K. | | Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 | Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 | -- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core