Re: [PATCH 1/2] buildchroot: Do not call 'apt-get update'

[Alexander Smirnov <asmirnov@ilbers.de>]

On 02/06/2018 12:12 PM, Alexander Smirnov wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On 02/05/2018 08:25 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> On 2018-02-05 18:06, Alexander Smirnov wrote:
>>> On 02/05/2018 07:51 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>>>> On 2018-02-05 17:43, Alexander Smirnov wrote:
>>>>> We should not do this to avoid local Packages.gz update.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Alexander Smirnov <asmirnov@ilbers.de>
>>>>> ---
>>>>>    meta/recipes-devtools/buildchroot/files/configscript.sh | 1 -
>>>>>    1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/meta/recipes-devtools/buildchroot/files/configscript.sh
>>>>> b/meta/recipes-devtools/buildchroot/files/configscript.sh
>>>>> index 9813c9a..458c94b 100644
>>>>> --- a/meta/recipes-devtools/buildchroot/files/configscript.sh
>>>>> +++ b/meta/recipes-devtools/buildchroot/files/configscript.sh
>>>>> @@ -44,5 +44,4 @@ mount -t devtmpfs -o mode=0755,nosuid devtmpfs /dev
>>>>>      #configuring packages
>>>>>    dpkg --configure -a
>>>>> -apt-get update
>>>>>    umount /dev
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Can you also explain why we (no longer?) need this? Just to ensure that
>>>> there are no subtle issues waiting to be surfaced.
>>>
>>> Multistrap calls 'apt-get install' for the list of packages, so at this
>>> point the '/var/lib/apt' folder is created. So the upstream state used
>>> to generate buildchroot is cached.
>>>
>>> The line I removed in this patch, is called *after* rootfs generation,
>>> so upstream state in cache could be possibly updated, do we need that?
>>
>> As we are heading for a single update run, no. I just wanted to ensure
>> that it's clear why we do not need it - and ideally also why we once
>> thought we need it.
>>
>> Jan
>>
> 
> I checked the patch which added thi and it was dated by 2016 and 
> contains big blobs for various scripts. I guess it was merge from some 
> existing example. I've double checked the multistrap Wiki page at 
> debian.org and manual, there is no recommendation to have it in 
> configscript. So due to it works without it - I'd like to drop it.

I mean drop 'apt-get update' :-)

Alex