From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-GM-THRID: 6812695221159067648 X-Received: by 2002:a50:af65:: with SMTP id g92mr5836372edd.301.1599041064814; Wed, 02 Sep 2020 03:04:24 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: isar-users@googlegroups.com Received: by 2002:a50:ea83:: with SMTP id d3ls1486119edo.2.gmail; Wed, 02 Sep 2020 03:04:24 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzgfoRlbd42J4Y6bm67RWpCfYFG56H5EBe0xwdqleP6djEB6ttK3b105i75MSuJabV53l71 X-Received: by 2002:a50:fc08:: with SMTP id i8mr5893112edr.257.1599041064159; Wed, 02 Sep 2020 03:04:24 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1599041064; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=urCZgveyM8hjTSrfOCatpY5ySoOF6H/wYClqCKKgKNuw8UIgWcIa77s7ZiCPBXayM+ idWOJXJ9F53PLWVxUA0DTEDxRQBjT1KcAC8qJi7TnHPavkAmfrR33LsH1gKJIE/Nr04I 1YjiRgYQM8tX+aBIN4c/kTpoBT0S0uCJ2KJxGsZkbCeQ49H7jKELB5f0jobJaK0GlBj1 Jgj1IdEmH6rwEge1YEDwC5HSfo8U82dRaK1YlzHg6ftiBSDlLrBY+NbI5LNOcXz9YyVg pxaquREtzRBPbDDcOlWWcrTu0ihAIHmW60mC11mbeQ6wRsZbJ+7d8z52c1Uw2jP4jsou zQwg== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:references:in-reply-to :message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date; bh=/WfyaJvUwSsThRjE0VdVOvQTuHTLhMA5FnMGQI06jy8=; b=i1alPbmxHtcuuyXT8SiU65Z4BxpegirkfqwGVgFfwzHTzQEbtW5qynHPaBnOtuiJIK OVbnSvotwu1dtrBbdEjHPHE3ltxgd4X9TuzQ4VhlDJQrV+NiQX04eB8FqKeda8mHtTam GSGlc2GSGU5HAeATa5X8StsgIEKsC2szrlFXEH8TsNoQ8TXFpQ2gyPfsdY2s2PT2jX2g ujAnXfvbW6s8RCJfZJodkushKk+nvOlZcmCpK31KxqyHAnnyZQ6Uju/vuwVEKEP8M4ai g+IEet4GbjPNoTlmRkgT0PcFF8Xw/I9spz7+8K4e1Ad/XyK3fSa01CnkXutLkGKvrJWb 5iJg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of henning.schild@siemens.com designates 194.138.37.40 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=henning.schild@siemens.com; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=siemens.com Return-Path: Received: from gecko.sbs.de (gecko.sbs.de. [194.138.37.40]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id k6si111346eds.3.2020.09.02.03.04.24 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 02 Sep 2020 03:04:24 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of henning.schild@siemens.com designates 194.138.37.40 as permitted sender) client-ip=194.138.37.40; Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of henning.schild@siemens.com designates 194.138.37.40 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=henning.schild@siemens.com; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=siemens.com Received: from mail2.sbs.de (mail2.sbs.de [192.129.41.66]) by gecko.sbs.de (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id 082A4NJU021755 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 2 Sep 2020 12:04:23 +0200 Received: from md1za8fc.ad001.siemens.net ([167.87.29.156]) by mail2.sbs.de (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 082A4M0n024044; Wed, 2 Sep 2020 12:04:22 +0200 Date: Wed, 2 Sep 2020 12:04:20 +0200 From: Henning Schild To: Baurzhan Ismagulov Cc: isar-users@googlegroups.com, vijaikumar.kanagarajan@gmail.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] fix and test wic exclude-path Message-ID: <20200902120420.6924e4f6@md1za8fc.ad001.siemens.net> In-Reply-To: <20200901195313.GJ11779@yssyq.m.ilbers.de> References: <20200406201648.26945-1-henning.schild@siemens.com> <20200610172627.09cfb239@md1za8fc.ad001.siemens.net> <20200612065522.GP5077@yssyq.m.ilbers.de> <20200612200335.0ad5c340@md1za8fc.ad001.siemens.net> <20200901195313.GJ11779@yssyq.m.ilbers.de> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.17.6 (GTK+ 2.24.32; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-TUID: v8y9wcd2XDUE Am Tue, 1 Sep 2020 21:53:14 +0200 schrieb Baurzhan Ismagulov : > Hello Henning, > > On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 08:03:35PM +0200, Henning Schild wrote: > > > 1. I'd like to understand what exactly is failing when the fix is > > > not applied. > > > > You have the code for that. Just revert the fix and you will see. > > Fair enough -- just thought it would speed up things. Using the exclude will cause our wic to raise an exception > > > > 2. The test case is failing with the fix applied. > > > > Just apply the changes and you will see ;). > > I meant that your patches started to fail in CI, see e.g. > http://ci.isar-build.org:8080/job/isar_ibr_devel_2_fast/12/consoleFull. > The build succeeds, but start_vm fails due to init dying. > > The problem seems to be that Debian doesn't support operating without > /usr anymore. We can fix it by saving a backup of the image before > generating one without /usr -- I'll send the updated patch. Oh i see. The idea was to just test wic and whether it would still crap out with its exception. There was no focus on whether that image was in fact bootable. And i am not surprised it is not ... > I'd be ready to apply this with the modification above. I see that > the wic series also touches this part but doesn't include the CI > patch. What would be the preferred way? > > 1. Apply this, rework the wic series, OR > > 2. Include the CI patch in the wic series and apply that. 3. apply the wic series and do not even care about the test The test was just there to motivate the backport, if we bump that would be much better. Henning > > With kind regards, > Baurzhan. >