On Fri, 2017-06-30 at 15:23 +0300, Ed Bartosh wrote: > On Fri, Jun 30, 2017 at 11:02:13AM +0200, Patrick Ohly wrote: > > On Fri, 2017-06-30 at 11:37 +0300, Ed Bartosh wrote: > > > > I'm not sure I understand this. If you don't want fstab to be > > > changed > > > > you should not specify mount points in .wks > > > > There is only one reason to have mount points in .wks: to make wic > > > to > > > > change /etc/fstab, which you apparently don't want. So, don't > > > specify > > > > mount points and you'll have what you want. > > > > > > > > Having additional option for this looks redundand to me. > > > > > > After thinking a bit more about it I'd propose to have global wic > > > option > > > to avoid rootfs content changes. Not just fstab updates, but any > > > changes. For now this option (--no-rootfs-update ?) should prevent > > > creating > > > images if either mount points are specified or --exclude-path is used > > > in .wks > > > > Why does --exclude-path conflict with --no-rootfs-update? Is that a > > conceptual problem or an implementation problem? > > > > I thought that removing directories from original rootfs is a > modification.
But it's not actually removed from the original roofs directory, right? For me, "not modified" refers to that and the files in it. -- Best Regards, Patrick Ohly The content of this message is my personal opinion only and although I am an employee of Intel, the statements I make here in no way represent Intel's position on the issue, nor am I authorized to speak on behalf of Intel on this matter. -- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core