From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Greylist: delayed 964 seconds by postgrey-1.34 at layers.openembedded.org; Thu, 24 Nov 2016 06:31:47 UTC Received: from metis.ext.4.pengutronix.de (metis.ext.4.pengutronix.de [92.198.50.35]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A820760119 for ; Thu, 24 Nov 2016 06:31:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pty.hi.pengutronix.de ([2001:67c:670:100:1d::c5]) by metis.ext.pengutronix.de with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1c9nJv-00044o-PM for openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org; Thu, 24 Nov 2016 07:15:43 +0100 Received: from uol by pty.hi.pengutronix.de with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1c9nJv-00077d-Gz for openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org; Thu, 24 Nov 2016 07:15:43 +0100 Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2016 07:15:43 +0100 From: Ulrich =?iso-8859-1?Q?=D6lmann?= To: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org Message-ID: <20161124061543.e2xpgh7zjir3oynk@pengutronix.de> References: <1479813004.3239.19.camel@intel.com> <6913e4bf-96dc-eefa-d214-9df5cde181b8@mender.io> <20161123120816.GC12545@linux.intel.com> <5064cacc-e724-c7b8-9631-3d961c5a29f6@mender.io> <20161123132229.GA13863@linux.intel.com> <1479916616.31880.48.camel@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1479916616.31880.48.camel@intel.com> X-Sent-From: Pengutronix Hildesheim X-URL: http://www.pengutronix.de/ X-IRC: #ptxdist @freenode X-Accept-Language: de,en X-Accept-Content-Type: text/plain X-Uptime: 06:49:32 up 13 days, 16:57, 7 users, load average: 0.00, 0.00, 0.00 User-Agent: Mutt/1.6.2-neo (2016-06-11) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 2001:67c:670:100:1d::c5 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: uol@pengutronix.de X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on metis.ext.pengutronix.de); SAEximRunCond expanded to false X-PTX-Original-Recipient: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org Subject: Re: Contents of non-rootfs partitions X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2016 06:31:47 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline 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 > > > " and the corresponding "part " 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 |