So it's something exclusively for OpenBMC.
As for running the scripts, you cannot simply conclude that a script
doesn't need to run if its contents did not change. It may very well
call the executable from its package to do the actual work and that may
have changed as well.
Met vriendelijke groet / kind regards,
Mike Looijmans
System Expert
TOPIC Embedded Products B.V.
Materiaalweg 4, 5681 RJ Best
The Netherlands
T: +31 (0) 499 33 69 69
E: mike.looijm...@topicproducts.com
W: www.topic.nl
Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail
On 22-03-2021 17:54, Anton Kachalov wrote:
Hi, Mike.
That is how OpenBMC is designed. Most of the targets are read-only
rootfs (squashfs) and overlayfs for RW.
It is not expected to overwrite binaries through overlayfs and there
are plans to scope RW areas (e.g. /etc).
Those files with 64-chars suffix are mostly hidden from regular users:
the files are removed during the first startup. No one will notice them :)
Anyway, alternatively within the openbmc update script it's possible
to force clean the deleted files on overlayfs upperdir. However, it
will mean that all the scripts regardless if they are updated or not,
will be re-executed after rootfs update.
On Mon, 22 Mar 2021 at 17:08, Mike Looijmans <mike.looijm...@topic.nl
<mailto:mike.looijm...@topic.nl>> wrote:
Two remarks below...
On 22-03-2021 16:45, Anton Kachalov via lists.openembedded.org
<http://lists.openembedded.org> wrote:
> From: "Anton D. Kachalov" <gmo...@google.com
<mailto:gmo...@google.com>>
>
> When running on read-only rootfs backed with overlayfs, the
processed scripts
> are being marked as deleted on upperdir of overlayfs. When it
comes to
> upgrade the main read-only image, it might contain new postinst
scripts that
> are different from the already processed. Introduced suffix
(sha256 of
> the content) allows to distinct updated scripts of the same package.
So your usecase is that you have a read-only rootfs with an
overlay on
top, and then just replace the rootfs. And then expect things to
still
work?
That doesn't sound valid to me - normally I'd wipe the overlay clean
when updating the underlying read-only part. I'd be very
interested in
what you're actually trying to accomplish here?
And further, I don't think appending 64 characters to filenames is
going
to make anyone happy.
In your case, I'd opt for a script that just resets the postinst
scripts
(and maybe more?) in the overlay. Or have 3 overlays. Whenever the
package manager runs, activate the second layer. The "user" stuff
in the
third layer is normally active. Then when you upgrade the system,
wipe
the second layer, to get rid of obsolete packages. Or something like
that. Again, tell us what you're really building...
>
> Signed-off-by: Anton D. Kachalov <gmo...@google.com
<mailto:gmo...@google.com>>
> ---
> meta/lib/oe/package_manager/deb/rootfs.py | 11 ++++++++++-
> meta/lib/oe/package_manager/ipk/rootfs.py | 11 ++++++++++-
> meta/lib/oe/package_manager/rpm/__init__.py | 4 +++-
> 3 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/meta/lib/oe/package_manager/deb/rootfs.py
b/meta/lib/oe/package_manager/deb/rootfs.py
> index 8fbaca11d6..704d213626 100644
> --- a/meta/lib/oe/package_manager/deb/rootfs.py
> +++ b/meta/lib/oe/package_manager/deb/rootfs.py
> @@ -4,6 +4,7 @@
>
> import re
> import shutil
> +from hashlib import sha256
> from oe.rootfs import Rootfs
> from oe.manifest import Manifest
> from oe.utils import execute_pre_post_process
> @@ -115,8 +116,16 @@ class DpkgOpkgRootfs(Rootfs):
> bb.utils.mkdirhier(dst_postinst_dir)
>
> if os.path.exists(os.path.join(src_postinst_dir, p
+ ".postinst")):
> + csum = sha256()
> + with open(src_postinst_dir, p + ".postinst",
"rb") as f:
> + while True:
> + data = f.read(65536)
> + if not data:
> + break
> + csum.update(data)
> +
> shutil.copy(os.path.join(src_postinst_dir, p + ".postinst"),
> - os.path.join(dst_postinst_dir, "%03d-%s" % (num, p)))
> + os.path.join(dst_postinst_dir, "%03d-%s.%s" % (num, p,
csum.hexdigest())))
>
> num += 1
>
> diff --git a/meta/lib/oe/package_manager/ipk/rootfs.py
b/meta/lib/oe/package_manager/ipk/rootfs.py
> index 26dbee6f6a..6ead6ddef3 100644
> --- a/meta/lib/oe/package_manager/ipk/rootfs.py
> +++ b/meta/lib/oe/package_manager/ipk/rootfs.py
> @@ -5,6 +5,7 @@
> import re
> import filecmp
> import shutil
> +from hashlib import sha256
> from oe.rootfs import Rootfs
> from oe.manifest import Manifest
> from oe.utils import execute_pre_post_process
> @@ -116,8 +117,16 @@ class DpkgOpkgRootfs(Rootfs):
> bb.utils.mkdirhier(dst_postinst_dir)
>
> if os.path.exists(os.path.join(src_postinst_dir, p
+ ".postinst")):
> + csum = sha256()
> + with open(src_postinst_dir, p + ".postinst",
"rb") as f:
> + while True:
> + data = f.read(65536)
> + if not data:
> + break
> + csum.update(data)
> +
> shutil.copy(os.path.join(src_postinst_dir, p + ".postinst"),
> - os.path.join(dst_postinst_dir, "%03d-%s" % (num, p)))
> + os.path.join(dst_postinst_dir, "%03d-%s.%s" % (num, p,
csum.hexdigest())))
>
> num += 1
>
> diff --git a/meta/lib/oe/package_manager/rpm/__init__.py
b/meta/lib/oe/package_manager/rpm/__init__.py
> index 6df0092281..4746e96ce8 100644
> --- a/meta/lib/oe/package_manager/rpm/__init__.py
> +++ b/meta/lib/oe/package_manager/rpm/__init__.py
> @@ -4,6 +4,7 @@
>
> import shutil
> import subprocess
> +from hashlib import sha256
> from oe.package_manager import *
>
> class RpmIndexer(Indexer):
> @@ -359,7 +360,8 @@ class RpmPM(PackageManager):
> target_path = oe.path.join(self.target_rootfs,
self.d.expand('${sysconfdir}/rpm-postinsts/'))
> bb.utils.mkdirhier(target_path)
> num = self._script_num_prefix(target_path)
> - saved_script_name = oe.path.join(target_path, "%d-%s" %
(num, pkg))
> + csum = sha256(output.encode("utf-8")).hexdigest()
> + saved_script_name = oe.path.join(target_path,
"%d-%s.%s" % (num, pkg, csum))
> open(saved_script_name, 'w').write(output)
> os.chmod(saved_script_name, 0o755)
>
>
>
>
--
Mike Looijmans
--
Mike Looijmans
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#149810):
https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/149810
Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/81527936/21656
Group Owner: openembedded-core+ow...@lists.openembedded.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/unsub
[arch...@mail-archive.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
