public inbox for isar-users@googlegroups.com
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Alexander Smirnov <asmirnov@ilbers.de>
To: isar-users@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] isar-image-base: fix owner and group of /proc
Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2017 20:07:42 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4777ea65-8495-faa9-9910-0e58bc62dbdc@ilbers.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20171117163448.7rzepplfu6npug72@MD1KR9XC.ww002.siemens.net>

Hi,

On 11/17/2017 07:34 PM, Christian Storm wrote:
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Christian Storm <christian.storm@siemens.com>
>>>>> ---
>>>>>     meta-isar/recipes-core/images/isar-image-base.bb | 2 +-
>>>>>     meta/recipes-devtools/buildchroot/buildchroot.bb | 2 +-
>>>>>     2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/meta-isar/recipes-core/images/isar-image-base.bb b/meta-isar/recipes-core/images/isar-image-base.bb
>>>>> index c2150b1..a6906c6 100644
>>>>> --- a/meta-isar/recipes-core/images/isar-image-base.bb
>>>>> +++ b/meta-isar/recipes-core/images/isar-image-base.bb
>>>>> @@ -52,7 +52,7 @@ do_rootfs() {
>>>>>             -e 's|##ISAR_DISTRO_SUITE##|${DEBDISTRONAME}|g' \
>>>>>                "${WORKDIR}/multistrap.conf.in" > "${WORKDIR}/multistrap.conf"
>>>>>     
>>>>> -    [ ! -d ${IMAGE_ROOTFS}/proc ] && install -d -m 555 ${IMAGE_ROOTFS}/proc
>>>>> +    [ ! -d ${IMAGE_ROOTFS}/proc ] && sudo install -d -o 0 -g 0 -m 555 ${IMAGE_ROOTFS}/proc
>>>>
>>>> What is the requirement for doing so? And what is the benefit?
>>>
>>> In the resulting image, /proc was created with my build user's ownership
>>> != root as it was non-existent. To create the directory belonging to
>>> root, sudo is required here...
>>>
>>
>> Thanks, got it! But I don't think it's also required for buildchroot.
> 
> Nope, not strictly required but for cosmetics and symmetry reasons I put
> it in there as well. Doesn't do harm either..
> 

So I'm going to apply the first part of the patch (related to image) to 
avoid adding new 'sudo' without real usecase.

Also in context of dropping 'sudo' from Isar, image generation and 
buildchroot generation are not so symmetric. buildchroot has less strict 
requirements (like out of GID/UID support) what makes it possible to use 
PRoot to completely drop 'sudo' around buildchroot operations. So 
keeping image and buildchroot generation processes synchronized could 
bring unnecessary difficulties.

Alex

  reply	other threads:[~2017-11-17 17:07 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-11-17  9:54 Christian Storm
2017-11-17 10:02 ` Alexander Smirnov
2017-11-17 10:17   ` Christian Storm
2017-11-17 10:34     ` Alexander Smirnov
2017-11-17 16:34       ` Christian Storm
2017-11-17 17:07         ` Alexander Smirnov [this message]
2017-11-20  8:12           ` Christian Storm
2017-11-26 22:06             ` Alexander Smirnov

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=4777ea65-8495-faa9-9910-0e58bc62dbdc@ilbers.de \
    --to=asmirnov@ilbers.de \
    --cc=isar-users@googlegroups.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox