Hi Ross,
Somehow dropped you from CC on my last reply. Can we give this another
shot? The error we saw should be unrelated to this patch, as the wic
image being tested here does not use core-image-minimal-initramfs at all.
Thanks,
Cal
On 02/06/2018 11:03 AM, Cal Sullivan wrote:
Shortly
Shortly after leaving work last night I realized that this error should
have nothing to do with the initrd/initramfs, as this wic image is not
using one.
Also, in 300 runs of this test the error didn't occur once, so it
appears to be very rare.
---
Cal
On 02/05/2018 05:52 PM, Cal Sullivan
On 02/05/2018 04:47 PM, Khem Raj wrote:
On Mon, Feb 5, 2018 at 4:15 PM Cal Sullivan
> wrote:
Looking at the test and the output, its expecting /dev/sda3 to be
mounted as /media and /dev/sda4 to be mounted as
On Mon, Feb 5, 2018 at 4:15 PM Cal Sullivan
wrote:
> Looking at the test and the output, its expecting /dev/sda3 to be mounted
> as /media and /dev/sda4 to be mounted as /mnt. With this test result, there
> is no /media, and instead /dev/sda3 is mounted to /mnt.
Looking at the test and the output, its expecting /dev/sda3 to be
mounted as /media and /dev/sda4 to be mounted as /mnt. With this test
result, there is no /media, and instead /dev/sda3 is mounted to /mnt.
That seems odd to me unless that partition either wasn't created or went
entirely
This is causing the qemu boot wic test to fail in oe-selftest:
2018-02-05 15:08:41,786 - oe-selftest - INFO - FAIL [64.639s]: test_qemu
(wic.Wic)
2018-02-05 15:08:41,786 - oe-selftest - INFO -
--
2018-02-05 15:08:41,786 -
Sorry, missed this. I'll pull it into MUT and throw it at the
autobuilder...
Ross
On 31 January 2018 at 22:53, Cal Sullivan
wrote:
> Ping.
>
> ---
> Cal
>
>
> On 01/09/2018 05:00 PM, Cal Sullivan wrote:
>
>> Anything wrong with this? Haven't seen it hit any
Ping.
---
Cal
On 01/09/2018 05:00 PM, Cal Sullivan wrote:
Anything wrong with this? Haven't seen it hit any mut branches.
Thanks,
Cal
On 12/19/2017 02:12 PM, California Sullivan wrote:
initramfs-framework is more modular and expandable. This change was
proposed in commit
Anything wrong with this? Haven't seen it hit any mut branches.
Thanks,
Cal
On 12/19/2017 02:12 PM, California Sullivan wrote:
initramfs-framework is more modular and expandable. This change was
proposed in commit 28fc6ba761ed4a47efa7c43e7f7dff5e2fe72b5e
"core-image-minimal-initramfs: use
initramfs-framework is more modular and expandable. This change was
proposed in commit 28fc6ba761ed4a47efa7c43e7f7dff5e2fe72b5e
"core-image-minimal-initramfs: use initramfs-framework by default" but
reverted due to the selftests runqemu.RunqemuTests.test_boot_machine_iso
and
10 matches
Mail list logo