Hi Am Sonntag, den 03.04.2016, 22:45 +0100 schrieb Richard Purdie: > On Sun, 2016-04-03 at 22:57 +0200, Max Krummenacher wrote: > > Addresses https://bugzilla.yoctoproject.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8939 > > > > Source files deployed with the *-dbg packages are owned by the user > > running bitbake leading to warnings as the one below. > > > > WARNING: glibc-2.23-r0 do_package_qa: QA Issue: glibc: /glibc > > -dbg/usr/src/debug/glibc/2.23-r0/git/include/resolv.h is owned by > > uid > > 1000, which is the same as the user running bitbake. This may be > > due > > to host contamination > > glibc: /glibc-dbg/usr/src/debug/glibc/2.23 > > -r0/git/include/monetary.h > > is owned by uid 1000, which is the same as the user running > > bitbake. > > This may be due to host contamination > > glibc: /glibc-dbg/usr/src/debug/glibc/2.23-r0/git/include/locale.h > > is > > owned by uid 1000, which is the same as the user running bitbake. > > This may be due to host contamination > > ... > > > > The files are copied as part of the do_package task. > > The patch chowns all file in packages/usr/src after cpio copied > > them > > into the > > package directory. > > > > Signed-off-by: Max Krummenacher <max.krummenac...@toradex.com> > > --- > > > > > > meta/classes/package.bbclass | 23 +++++++++++++++++++++++ > > 1 file changed, 23 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/meta/classes/package.bbclass > > b/meta/classes/package.bbclass > > index bdbe96d..d9ef62c 100644 > > --- a/meta/classes/package.bbclass > > +++ b/meta/classes/package.bbclass > > @@ -362,6 +362,7 @@ def copydebugsources(debugsrcdir, d): > > # and copied to the destination here. > > > > import stat > > + import subprocess > > > > sourcefile = d.expand("${WORKDIR}/debugsources.list") > > if debugsrcdir and os.path.isfile(sourcefile): > > @@ -410,6 +411,28 @@ def copydebugsources(debugsrcdir, d): > > if retval: > > bb.fatal("debugsrc symlink fixup failed with exit code > > %s (cmd was %s)" % (retval, cmd)) > > > > + # cpio --no-preserve-owner does not create the destination > > files with > > + # owner root even when run under pseudo, chown them > > explicitely. > > How about passing --owner=0:0 to cpio? > > I'm a little worried about why I don't see this failure on my own > local > builds. > > We have a few cases where things sometimes seem to work out and > sometimes don't and I'd love to get to the bottom of how to reproduce > it and to understand why its different for different people.
I finally got enough time to investigate further. I found cpio -l (i.e. createing hardlinks) under pseudo does not set the owner to root, neither width --no-preserve-owner nor width - -owner=0:0. The file ownership in yocto is corrected later with fs-perms.txt. Angstrom does provide its own fs perms configuration which disables the oe-core fs-perms.txt. But due to a bug the angstrom file is not active. Patch sent to the angstrom ML. http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.distributions.angstrom.devel/7856 Max > Cheers, > > Richard -- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
