Re: [PATCH 0/3] fix and test wic exclude-path

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

Am Fri, 12 Jun 2020 20:11:48 +0200
schrieb "[ext] Henning Schild" <henning.schild@siemens.com>:

> Am Fri, 12 Jun 2020 17:17:19 +0200
> schrieb "[ext] Jan Kiszka" <jan.kiszka@siemens.com>:
> 
> > On 12.06.20 08:55, Baurzhan Ismagulov wrote:  
> > > Hello Henning,
> > > 
> > > On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 05:26:27PM +0200, Henning Schild wrote:
> > >  
> > >> Still having to work around that in a downstream layer. Any more
> > >> comments or questions?    
> > > 
> > > I'd like to look at the following issues:
> > > 
> > > 1. I'd like to understand what exactly is failing when the fix is
> > > not applied.
> > > 
> > > 2. The test case is failing with the fix applied.
> > >     
> > 
> > Before we dig too deep on details:
> > 
> > The pressure to update wic to a more recent version is increasing,
> > just received another request today, so is our backlog of own
> > upstream patches missing in Isar. I would proppose starting that
> > update and then focuson  testing and stabilization of the result.  
> 
> Agreed, we should make sure to use a recent bitbake and wic from
> upstream. But we have a horrible fork with backports right now ...

The clear goal should be submodules or something like it. To prevent
any isar specifics and enforce upstream work. Having copies allowed us
to get into this mess. (talking about bitbake and libs here) Those
other backports should never have been merged ... i just follow along
here ...

Henning

> The history of this one is so that upstream would never have worked.
> But now that upstream fixed it we could try.
> 
> > Did anyone look into that already?  
> 
> Briefly ... did not work out of the box. The problem with wic is that
> it potentially uses new tool args that we do not have in all distros
> yet. But that can be worked around with some nasty magic and wrappers
> ... did that in the early stages before we decided to not support <
> debian 9 with it.
> 
> Henning
> 
> > Jan
> >   
>