Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] isar-bootstrap|configscript: implement one shot config option

[Henning Schild <henning.schild@siemens.com>]

Am Thu, 24 May 2018 09:06:56 +0200
schrieb Claudius Heine <claudius.heine.ext@siemens.com>:

> Hi Henning,
> 
> On 2018-05-23 16:06, Henning Schild wrote:
> > Am Wed, 23 May 2018 15:12:46 +0200
> > schrieb "[ext] claudius.heine.ext@siemens.com"
> > <claudius.heine.ext@siemens.com>:
> >   
> >> From: Claudius Heine <ch@denx.de>
> >>
> >> Some configuration tasks on the image require certain other
> >> packages, but those packages might not be required on the final
> >> image.
> >>
> >> One way to solve this is use a special package that is installed to
> >> the image and then removed again. When installing it makes certain
> >> that all required packages are installed to the image as well. Then
> >> the image can be configured in the postinst hook. When this package
> >> is removed and all unused dependencies are removed as well, no not
> >> required packages used by this package should remain on the image.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Claudius Heine <ch@denx.de>
> >> ---
> >>   .../images/files/debian-configscript.sh       |  1 -
> >>   .../images/files/raspbian-configscript.sh     |  1 -
> >>   meta/classes/isar-bootstrap-helper.bbclass    | 23
> >> +++++++++++++++---- 3 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 6
> >> deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git
> >> a/meta-isar/recipes-core/images/files/debian-configscript.sh
> >> b/meta-isar/recipes-core/images/files/debian-configscript.sh index
> >> 7ca0562..9b3ff30 100755 ---
> >> a/meta-isar/recipes-core/images/files/debian-configscript.sh +++
> >> b/meta-isar/recipes-core/images/files/debian-configscript.sh @@
> >> -40,4 +40,3 @@ fi # Purge unused locale and installed
> >> packages' .deb files localepurge
> >> -apt-get clean
> >> diff --git
> >> a/meta-isar/recipes-core/images/files/raspbian-configscript.sh
> >> b/meta-isar/recipes-core/images/files/raspbian-configscript.sh
> >> index b240de9..448dea5 100644 ---
> >> a/meta-isar/recipes-core/images/files/raspbian-configscript.sh +++
> >> b/meta-isar/recipes-core/images/files/raspbian-configscript.sh @@
> >> -40,4 +40,3 @@ kernel=$KERNEL_IMAGE EOF
> >>   localepurge
> >> -apt-get clean
> >> diff --git a/meta/classes/isar-bootstrap-helper.bbclass
> >> b/meta/classes/isar-bootstrap-helper.bbclass index 4284d02..76e20f6
> >> 100644 --- a/meta/classes/isar-bootstrap-helper.bbclass
> >> +++ b/meta/classes/isar-bootstrap-helper.bbclass
> >> @@ -5,15 +5,17 @@
> >>   #
> >>   # SPDX-License-Identifier: MIT
> >>   
> >> +IMAGE_CFG_PACKAGE ??= ""
> >> +
> >>   setup_root_file_system() {
> >>       ROOTFSDIR="$1"
> >> -    CLEANHOSTLEAK="$2"
> >> +    CLEAN="$2"
> >>       shift
> >>       shift
> >>       PACKAGES="$@"
> >>       APT_ARGS="install --yes --allow-unauthenticated \
> >>                 -o Debug::pkgProblemResolver=yes"  
> > 
> > I guess if you take the "install" out you can reuse that a few more
> > times.  
> 
> Where? I only see purge and autoremove that doesn't use it already. 
> Replaceing '-y' with '${APT_ARGS}' there does seem like an overkill, 
> does it not? The other options in it don't do much for purge and 
> autoremove AFAIK.

I did not check whether the rest is usefull for purge etc. In that case
i would suggest to stick with "--yes" instead of "-y" just for
consistency.

Henning

> If you think of this as a general improvement to have the command 
> outside of the 'APT_ARGS' variable for readability reasons, then I 
> agree, but that would be a different patch.
> 
> >   
> >> -    CLEANHOSTLEAK_FILES="${ROOTFSDIR}/etc/hostname
> >> ${ROOTFSDIR}/etc/resolv.conf"
> >> +    CLEAN_FILES="${ROOTFSDIR}/etc/hostname
> >> ${ROOTFSDIR}/etc/resolv.conf"
> >>       sudo cp -Trpfx \
> >>           "${DEPLOY_DIR_IMAGE}/isar-bootstrap-${DISTRO}-${DISTRO_ARCH}/"
> >> \ @@ -41,8 +43,21 @@ setup_root_file_system() {
> >>           -o Dir::Etc::sourceparts="-" \
> >>           -o APT::Get::List-Cleanup="0"
> >>       sudo -E chroot "$ROOTFSDIR" \
> >> -        /usr/bin/apt-get ${APT_ARGS} --download-only $PACKAGES
> >> -    [ "clean" = ${CLEANHOSTLEAK} ] && sudo rm -f
> >> ${CLEANHOSTLEAK_FILES}
> >> +        /usr/bin/apt-get ${APT_ARGS} --download-only $PACKAGES \
> >> +            ${IMAGE_CFG_PACKAGE}
> >> +    [ "clean" = ${CLEAN} ] && sudo rm -f ${CLEAN_FILES}
> >>       sudo -E chroot "$ROOTFSDIR" \
> >>           /usr/bin/apt-get ${APT_ARGS} $PACKAGES
> >> +    if [ -n "${IMAGE_CFG_PACKAGE}" ]; then
> >> +        sudo -E chroot "$ROOTFSDIR" \
> >> +            /usr/bin/apt-get ${APT_ARGS} ${IMAGE_CFG_PACKAGE}  
> > 
> > Say we have multiple packages here, are we sure apt-get will get the
> > order right?
> > Would it make sense to use a loop to deal with potential lists and
> > their order?
> > 
> > Henning
> >   
> >> +        sudo -E chroot "$ROOTFSDIR" \
> >> +            /usr/bin/apt-get purge -y ${IMAGE_CFG_PACKAGE}
> >> +    fi
> >> +    if [ "clean" = ${CLEAN} ]; then
> >> +        sudo -E chroot "$ROOTFSDIR" \
> >> +            /usr/bin/apt-get autoremove --purge -y
> >> +        sudo -E chroot "$ROOTFSDIR" \
> >> +            /usr/bin/apt-get clean
> >> +    fi
> >>   }  
> >   
>