From: Alexander Smirnov <asmirnov@ilbers.de>
To: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@siemens.com>, isar-users@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 9/9] wic: now truly go for the wic version we claim to have
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2018 14:11:28 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <dc638807-71e6-db7c-4dfe-b2bbdb6d16e7@ilbers.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <9882db52-7c2e-d135-2ca5-13c5b9a722a7@siemens.com>
On 01/31/2018 01:55 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> On 2018-01-31 11:11, Alexander Smirnov wrote:
>> On 01/31/2018 12:42 PM, Henning Schild wrote:
>>> 2b164b18fd639c9 claims to introduce wic hash 131629ca6238ea05
>>> This commit really carries that version of wic.
>>>
>>> Issue:
>>> - the wic version in Isar was modified
>>> - that causes:
>>> - confusion, maintainability and updateability issues
>>> - potential quality issues
>>>
>>> Impact:
>>> This patch and the previous reverts get wic back to a state where all
>>> these Issues are solved. We could now just update our wic without
>>> having
>>> to worry about local patches. In case of a wic-update Isar and layers
>>> on top would still have to review their plugins.
>>
>> Does upstream wic script rely on the content from lib/plugins?
>>
>> For example some recent commit updates both:
>>
>> https://github.com/openembedded/openembedded-core/commit/00420ec42140c1b752132bda190dede85756d157#diff-df4a70bc146d3159891d7a410f2521a1
>>
>>
>> So due to customized plugins below we should worry and keep this in mind.
>
> Sure, we have to keep an eye on wic<->plugin API changes when updating
> wic to the next upstream version. Nothing new, though, when you write
> plugins for wic (like we do for firmware update mechanisms, also over
> Yocto).
This patch claims that the wic maintenance becomes easier. What is the
idea of this claim? Wic is based on both: 'scripts/wic' and 'lib/wic',
they don't work without each other. Whole this series performs migration
of changes from 'scripts/wic' to 'lib/wic', so eventually there is no
unmodified upstream wic support, the only script stays unmodified while
plugins are patched.
So I'm a bit confused, what is the core difference with existing
approach, and how this approach fixes maintainability and updateability
issues?
Alex
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-01-31 11:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 51+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-01-31 9:41 [PATCH 0/9] first wic integration Henning Schild
2018-01-31 9:41 ` [PATCH 1/9] classes: image: introduce size measuring function, for before do_*_image Henning Schild
2018-01-31 9:41 ` [PATCH 2/9] images: new class wic-img for wic intregration Henning Schild
2018-02-13 14:44 ` Alexander Smirnov
2018-02-13 16:06 ` Henning Schild
2018-01-31 9:41 ` [PATCH 3/9] wic: add a bootimg-efi-isar plugin outside the wic tree Henning Schild
2018-02-12 17:48 ` Jan Kiszka
2018-01-31 9:41 ` [PATCH 4/9] Revert "wic: Make the bootimg-efi plugin generate usable images" Henning Schild
2018-01-31 9:41 ` [PATCH 5/9] Revert "wic: Introduce the `WicExecError` exception class" Henning Schild
2018-01-31 9:41 ` [PATCH 6/9] Revert "wic: Work around mcopy error" Henning Schild
2018-01-31 9:41 ` [PATCH 7/9] Revert "wic: Use sudo instead of pseudo" Henning Schild
2018-01-31 9:41 ` [PATCH 8/9] Revert "wic: Remove sysroot support" Henning Schild
2018-01-31 9:42 ` [PATCH 9/9] wic: now truly go for the wic version we claim to have Henning Schild
2018-01-31 10:11 ` Alexander Smirnov
2018-01-31 10:55 ` Jan Kiszka
2018-01-31 11:11 ` Alexander Smirnov [this message]
2018-01-31 11:43 ` Jan Kiszka
2018-01-31 11:53 ` Baurzhan Ismagulov
2018-01-31 12:01 ` Jan Kiszka
2018-01-31 12:28 ` Baurzhan Ismagulov
2018-01-31 13:53 ` Henning Schild
2018-01-31 14:01 ` Baurzhan Ismagulov
2018-01-31 14:21 ` Henning Schild
2018-01-31 10:02 ` [PATCH 0/9] first wic integration Alexander Smirnov
2018-01-31 10:12 ` Henning Schild
2018-01-31 11:24 ` Baurzhan Ismagulov
2018-01-31 11:47 ` Jan Kiszka
2018-01-31 12:02 ` Baurzhan Ismagulov
2018-01-31 12:15 ` Jan Kiszka
2018-01-31 13:30 ` Jan Kiszka
2018-01-31 13:41 ` Baurzhan Ismagulov
2018-01-31 14:01 ` Jan Kiszka
2018-01-31 15:21 ` Baurzhan Ismagulov
2018-01-31 15:46 ` Henning Schild
2018-01-31 16:13 ` Jan Kiszka
2018-01-31 13:35 ` Baurzhan Ismagulov
2018-01-31 13:47 ` Henning Schild
2018-01-31 14:00 ` Baurzhan Ismagulov
2018-01-31 13:46 ` Henning Schild
2018-01-31 13:36 ` Henning Schild
2018-01-31 13:40 ` Baurzhan Ismagulov
2018-01-31 13:05 ` Henning Schild
2018-02-01 12:41 ` [PATCH] images: wic: limit use of sudo and enable manual call again Henning Schild
2018-02-01 12:44 ` Henning Schild
2018-02-01 16:09 ` Baurzhan Ismagulov
2018-02-01 18:10 ` Henning Schild
2018-02-01 18:55 ` Henning Schild
2018-02-12 19:07 ` Henning Schild
2018-02-12 17:27 ` [PATCH 0/9] first wic integration Henning Schild
2018-02-12 18:21 ` Alexander Smirnov
2018-02-12 18:30 ` Henning Schild
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=dc638807-71e6-db7c-4dfe-b2bbdb6d16e7@ilbers.de \
--to=asmirnov@ilbers.de \
--cc=isar-users@googlegroups.com \
--cc=jan.kiszka@siemens.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