Re: [OE-core] [poky] [PATCH 0/7] User/group creation at preinstall
Shouldn't patches like this be sent to the oe-core list? It wouldn't have saved me from the selinux bug in shadow, though :) Op 31 mei 2011, om 20:13 heeft Scott Garman het volgende geschreven: Hi Saul, This pull request includes everything needed to add the ability to create custom users and groups in our images/packages and the corresponding ability to set custom ownership permissions. There is a useradd-example.bb file in meta-skeleton which provides a heavily-commented example recipe to demonstrate how this feature can be used. I'd like to request that Mark Hatle and Richard do a code review of this and offer their Acked-by: support if they are happy with things. Once this gets into master, I'm happy to write up a short section for the Poky Reference Manual to document it in a more visible way. Scott The following changes since commit 1169f1b066d0028bd2ef7915440450bd42ef165e: license.bbclass: Sane Parsing of licenses (2011-05-27 23:36:24 +0100) are available in the git repository at: git://git.pokylinux.org/poky-contrib sgarman/user-group-creation http://git.pokylinux.org/cgit.cgi/poky-contrib/log/?h=sgarman/user-group-creation Scott Garman (7): shadow: recipe and patch cleanup shadow: add a -native recipe with customized utilities base-passwd: add -cross recipe with default login.defs useradd.bbclass: new class for managing user/group permissions useradd-example: example recipe for using inherit useradd bitbake.conf: set PSEUDO_PASSWD within FAKEROOTENV package_rpm.bbclass: make RPM use on-disk permissions .../recipes-skeleton/useradd/useradd-example.bb| 59 + meta/classes/package_rpm.bbclass |2 + meta/classes/useradd.bbclass | 136 ++ meta/conf/bitbake.conf |2 +- .../base-passwd/base-passwd-3.5.22/login.defs | 386 ++ .../base-passwd/base-passwd-cross_3.5.22.bb| 53 + .../shadow/files/add_root_cmd_options.patch| 1293 .../files/shadow-4.1.3-dots-in-usernames.patch |4 + .../shadow-4.1.4.2-env-reset-keep-locale.patch |4 + .../files/shadow-4.1.4.2-groupmod-pam-check.patch |4 + .../files/shadow-4.1.4.2-su_no_sanitize_env.patch |4 + .../shadow/files/shadow.automake-1.11.patch|4 + .../shadow/shadow-native_4.1.4.3.bb| 66 + meta/recipes-extended/shadow/shadow.inc| 121 -- meta/recipes-extended/shadow/shadow_4.1.4.3.bb | 141 ++- 15 files changed, 2148 insertions(+), 131 deletions(-) create mode 100644 meta-skeleton/recipes-skeleton/useradd/useradd-example.bb create mode 100644 meta-skeleton/recipes-skeleton/useradd/useradd-example/file1 create mode 100644 meta-skeleton/recipes-skeleton/useradd/useradd-example/file2 create mode 100644 meta-skeleton/recipes-skeleton/useradd/useradd-example/file3 create mode 100644 meta-skeleton/recipes-skeleton/useradd/useradd-example/file4 create mode 100644 meta/classes/useradd.bbclass create mode 100644 meta/recipes-core/base-passwd/base-passwd-3.5.22/login.defs create mode 100644 meta/recipes-core/base-passwd/base-passwd-cross_3.5.22.bb create mode 100644 meta/recipes-extended/shadow/files/add_root_cmd_options.patch create mode 100644 meta/recipes-extended/shadow/shadow-native_4.1.4.3.bb delete mode 100644 meta/recipes-extended/shadow/shadow.inc ___ poky mailing list p...@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/poky ___ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
Re: [OE-core] [poky] [PATCH 0/7] User/group creation at preinstall
On 05/31/2011 11:45 AM, Koen Kooi wrote: Shouldn't patches like this be sent to the oe-core list? It wouldn't have saved me from the selinux bug in shadow, though :) Scott, I would agree with Koen, this is a oe-core change, not a Poky only change, please resend this request to the oe-core list. Thanks Sau! Op 31 mei 2011, om 20:13 heeft Scott Garman het volgende geschreven: Hi Saul, This pull request includes everything needed to add the ability to create custom users and groups in our images/packages and the corresponding ability to set custom ownership permissions. There is a useradd-example.bb file in meta-skeleton which provides a heavily-commented example recipe to demonstrate how this feature can be used. I'd like to request that Mark Hatle and Richard do a code review of this and offer their Acked-by: support if they are happy with things. Once this gets into master, I'm happy to write up a short section for the Poky Reference Manual to document it in a more visible way. Scott The following changes since commit 1169f1b066d0028bd2ef7915440450bd42ef165e: license.bbclass: Sane Parsing of licenses (2011-05-27 23:36:24 +0100) are available in the git repository at: git://git.pokylinux.org/poky-contrib sgarman/user-group-creation http://git.pokylinux.org/cgit.cgi/poky-contrib/log/?h=sgarman/user-group-creation Scott Garman (7): shadow: recipe and patch cleanup shadow: add a -native recipe with customized utilities base-passwd: add -cross recipe with default login.defs useradd.bbclass: new class for managing user/group permissions useradd-example: example recipe for using inherit useradd bitbake.conf: set PSEUDO_PASSWD within FAKEROOTENV package_rpm.bbclass: make RPM use on-disk permissions .../recipes-skeleton/useradd/useradd-example.bb| 59 + meta/classes/package_rpm.bbclass |2 + meta/classes/useradd.bbclass | 136 ++ meta/conf/bitbake.conf |2 +- .../base-passwd/base-passwd-3.5.22/login.defs | 386 ++ .../base-passwd/base-passwd-cross_3.5.22.bb| 53 + .../shadow/files/add_root_cmd_options.patch| 1293 .../files/shadow-4.1.3-dots-in-usernames.patch |4 + .../shadow-4.1.4.2-env-reset-keep-locale.patch |4 + .../files/shadow-4.1.4.2-groupmod-pam-check.patch |4 + .../files/shadow-4.1.4.2-su_no_sanitize_env.patch |4 + .../shadow/files/shadow.automake-1.11.patch|4 + .../shadow/shadow-native_4.1.4.3.bb| 66 + meta/recipes-extended/shadow/shadow.inc| 121 -- meta/recipes-extended/shadow/shadow_4.1.4.3.bb | 141 ++- 15 files changed, 2148 insertions(+), 131 deletions(-) create mode 100644 meta-skeleton/recipes-skeleton/useradd/useradd-example.bb create mode 100644 meta-skeleton/recipes-skeleton/useradd/useradd-example/file1 create mode 100644 meta-skeleton/recipes-skeleton/useradd/useradd-example/file2 create mode 100644 meta-skeleton/recipes-skeleton/useradd/useradd-example/file3 create mode 100644 meta-skeleton/recipes-skeleton/useradd/useradd-example/file4 create mode 100644 meta/classes/useradd.bbclass create mode 100644 meta/recipes-core/base-passwd/base-passwd-3.5.22/login.defs create mode 100644 meta/recipes-core/base-passwd/base-passwd-cross_3.5.22.bb create mode 100644 meta/recipes-extended/shadow/files/add_root_cmd_options.patch create mode 100644 meta/recipes-extended/shadow/shadow-native_4.1.4.3.bb delete mode 100644 meta/recipes-extended/shadow/shadow.inc ___ poky mailing list p...@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/poky ___ poky mailing list p...@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/poky ___ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
Re: [OE-core] [poky] [PATCH 0/7] User/group creation at preinstall
On 05/31/2011 12:06 PM, Saul Wold wrote: On 05/31/2011 11:45 AM, Koen Kooi wrote: Shouldn't patches like this be sent to the oe-core list? It wouldn't have saved me from the selinux bug in shadow, though :) Scott, I would agree with Koen, this is a oe-core change, not a Poky only change, please resend this request to the oe-core list. Sure, I'll resend it to oe-core. That said, I have no idea what criteria should be used to determine which list to send things to, and I'm sure I'm not the only one. Is this documented anywhere? Scott -- Scott Garman Embedded Linux Engineer - Yocto Project Intel Open Source Technology Center ___ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
Re: [OE-core] [poky] [PATCH 0/7] User/group creation at preinstall
On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 19:51, Scott Garman scott.a.gar...@intel.com wrote: That said, I have no idea what criteria should be used to determine which list to send things to, and I'm sure I'm not the only one. Is this documented anywhere? It seems to me that poky list ought to be not used anymore and patches to be send to oe-core as AFAIK Yocto will base on it. Am I missing anything? This is really confusing. This is not just regarding mailing lists but also IRC channels :-/ -- Otavio Salvador O.S. Systems E-mail: ota...@ossystems.com.br http://www.ossystems.com.br Mobile: +55 53 9981-7854 http://projetos.ossystems.com.br ___ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
Re: [OE-core] [poky] [PATCH 0/7] User/group creation at preinstall
On 5/31/11 2:57 PM, Otavio Salvador wrote: On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 19:51, Scott Garman scott.a.gar...@intel.com wrote: That said, I have no idea what criteria should be used to determine which list to send things to, and I'm sure I'm not the only one. Is this documented anywhere? It seems to me that poky list ought to be not used anymore and patches to be send to oe-core as AFAIK Yocto will base on it. Am I missing anything? This is really confusing. This is not just regarding mailing lists but also IRC channels :-/ As I understand it, the intention is the Poky list is used for Poky specific items or to discuss (from a Poky specific point of view) oe-core items.. I.e. problems, issues, etc from the usage of oe-core within the Poky use. The confusion currently comes from many of the oe-core items used to live in the Poky domain, and no longer due. Unfortunately this will take a bit of education for folks who don't contribute daily so that they know which mailing list to use. (In otherwords the Poky list still has it's place, but only for Poky specific discussions.) --Mark ___ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
Re: [OE-core] [poky] [PATCH 0/7] User/group creation at preinstall
On Tue, 2011-05-31 at 12:51 -0700, Scott Garman wrote: On 05/31/2011 12:06 PM, Saul Wold wrote: On 05/31/2011 11:45 AM, Koen Kooi wrote: Shouldn't patches like this be sent to the oe-core list? It wouldn't have saved me from the selinux bug in shadow, though :) Scott, I would agree with Koen, this is a oe-core change, not a Poky only change, please resend this request to the oe-core list. Sure, I'll resend it to oe-core. That said, I have no idea what criteria should be used to determine which list to send things to, and I'm sure I'm not the only one. Is this documented anywhere? We're trying to make this simpler over time: bitbake changes - bitbake-devel Any code in oe-core - oe-core list Anything in poky not in oe-core/bitbake - poky list Cheers, Richard ___ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
Re: [OE-core] [poky] [PATCH 0/7] User/group creation at preinstall
On 05/31/2011 02:16 PM, Mark Hatle wrote: On 5/31/11 2:57 PM, Otavio Salvador wrote: On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 19:51, Scott Garmanscott.a.gar...@intel.com wrote: That said, I have no idea what criteria should be used to determine which list to send things to, and I'm sure I'm not the only one. Is this documented anywhere? It seems to me that poky list ought to be not used anymore and patches to be send to oe-core as AFAIK Yocto will base on it. Am I missing anything? This is really confusing. This is not just regarding mailing lists but also IRC channels :-/ As I understand it, the intention is the Poky list is used for Poky specific items or to discuss (from a Poky specific point of view) oe-core items.. I.e. problems, issues, etc from the usage of oe-core within the Poky use. The confusion currently comes from many of the oe-core items used to live in the Poky domain, and no longer due. Unfortunately this will take a bit of education for folks who don't contribute daily so that they know which mailing list to use. (In otherwords the Poky list still has it's place, but only for Poky specific discussions.) So presumably this would mean: if it's about a recipe that is not in OE-core, it's Poky-specific? Which would also mean that discussion about anything in the bitbake classes belongs on OE-core as well, yes? Scott -- Scott Garman Embedded Linux Engineer - Yocto Project Intel Open Source Technology Center ___ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
