From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from 93-97-173-237.zone5.bethere.co.uk ([93.97.173.237] helo=tim.rpsys.net) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1SC8KU-0001lM-Ei for openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org; Mon, 26 Mar 2012 13:43:18 +0200 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tim.rpsys.net (8.13.6/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q2QBYKwN024795; Mon, 26 Mar 2012 12:34:20 +0100 Received: from tim.rpsys.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (tim.rpsys.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 24700-01; Mon, 26 Mar 2012 12:34:16 +0100 (BST) Received: from [192.168.3.10] ([192.168.3.10]) (authenticated bits=0) by tim.rpsys.net (8.13.6/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q2QBY9bo024789 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 26 Mar 2012 12:34:10 +0100 Message-ID: <1332761648.28414.113.camel@ted> From: Richard Purdie To: Andreas Oberritter Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2012 12:34:08 +0100 In-Reply-To: <4F6CDA62.3070908@opendreambox.org> References: <1331345726-9577-1-git-send-email-obi@opendreambox.org> <4F5E1672.7090706@windriver.com> <1331567634.15192.20.camel@ted> <4F6CDA62.3070908@opendreambox.org> X-Mailer: Evolution 3.2.2- Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rpsys.net Cc: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer Subject: Re: [PATCH] package_ipk: apply umask to control and conffiles X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Reply-To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2012 11:43:18 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Fri, 2012-03-23 at 21:17 +0100, Andreas Oberritter wrote: > On 12.03.2012 16:53, Richard Purdie wrote: > > On Mon, 2012-03-12 at 10:29 -0500, Mark Hatle wrote: > >> On 3/9/12 8:15 PM, Andreas Oberritter wrote: > >>> * Explicitly set umask to 022. Otherwise the build system's > >>> umask leaks into the image. > >> > >> I'm surprised that do_package_ipk[umask] didn't work. Perhaps its the way it's > >> being invoked that is the issue. (If bitbake doesn't run it, but something else > >> does.. then the umask setting doesn't get used.) > >> > >> As for the change of the umask, the changes appear to be specific to the ipk > >> case. Is this the desired behavior, or could deb and rpm suffer from similar > >> issues? (I'm not familiar enough with opkg to know how it handles umask > >> settings during package install/rootfs construction..) > >> > >> I believe that RPM sets a default umask when it goes through it's package > >> installs/rootfs generation. But does DEB? > > > > I'm also a bit worried about this patch. I'd like to understand why a > > task level umask doesn't work. That shouldn't even make any difference > > since the permissions/owners/users from install should be getting > > used... > > can you please give some advise on how to continue with this issue? I understand half the problem now, the files with the issues are ones created during the package_ipk task. That addresses one of my big concerns. The second thing I'd like to understand is why a task level umask doesn't resolve this. Looking at what you tried, this might be as simple as a typo: do_package_ipk[umask] = "022" when you really want: do_package_write_ipk[umask] = "022" If that works, lets set this for deb and rpm too so we're consistent and I'll merge that patch :) Cheers, Richard