Patchwork [0/7] User/group creation at preinstall

login
register
mail settings
Submitter Scott Garman
Date May 31, 2011, 7:53 p.m.
Message ID <cover.1306865217.git.scott.a.garman@intel.com>
Download mbox
Permalink /patch/5125/
State New, archived
Headers show

Pull-request

git://git.pokylinux.org/poky-contrib sgarman/user-group-creation

Comments

Scott Garman - May 31, 2011, 7:53 p.m.
Hi Saul,

This pull request includes everything needed to add the ability to
create custom users and groups in our images/packages and the
corresponding ability to set custom ownership permissions. 

There is a useradd-example.bb file in meta-skeleton which provides
a heavily-commented example recipe to demonstrate how this feature
can be used.

I'd like to request that Mark Hatle and Richard do a code review of
this and offer their Acked-by: support if they are happy with things.

Once this gets into master, I'm happy to write up a short section for
the Poky Reference Manual to document it in a more visible way.

Scott

The following changes since commit 1169f1b066d0028bd2ef7915440450bd42ef165e:

  license.bbclass: Sane Parsing of licenses (2011-05-27 23:36:24 +0100)

are available in the git repository at:
  git://git.pokylinux.org/poky-contrib sgarman/user-group-creation
  http://git.pokylinux.org/cgit.cgi/poky-contrib/log/?h=sgarman/user-group-creation

Scott Garman (7):
  shadow: recipe and patch cleanup
  shadow: add a -native recipe with customized utilities
  base-passwd: add -cross recipe with default login.defs
  useradd.bbclass: new class for managing user/group permissions
  useradd-example: example recipe for using inherit useradd
  bitbake.conf: set PSEUDO_PASSWD within FAKEROOTENV
  package_rpm.bbclass: make RPM use on-disk permissions

 .../recipes-skeleton/useradd/useradd-example.bb    |   59 +
 meta/classes/package_rpm.bbclass                   |    2 +
 meta/classes/useradd.bbclass                       |  136 ++
 meta/conf/bitbake.conf                             |    2 +-
 .../base-passwd/base-passwd-3.5.22/login.defs      |  386 ++++++
 .../base-passwd/base-passwd-cross_3.5.22.bb        |   53 +
 .../shadow/files/add_root_cmd_options.patch        | 1293 ++++++++++++++++++++
 .../files/shadow-4.1.3-dots-in-usernames.patch     |    4 +
 .../shadow-4.1.4.2-env-reset-keep-locale.patch     |    4 +
 .../files/shadow-4.1.4.2-groupmod-pam-check.patch  |    4 +
 .../files/shadow-4.1.4.2-su_no_sanitize_env.patch  |    4 +
 .../shadow/files/shadow.automake-1.11.patch        |    4 +
 .../shadow/shadow-native_4.1.4.3.bb                |   66 +
 meta/recipes-extended/shadow/shadow.inc            |  121 --
 meta/recipes-extended/shadow/shadow_4.1.4.3.bb     |  141 ++-
 15 files changed, 2148 insertions(+), 131 deletions(-)
 create mode 100644 meta-skeleton/recipes-skeleton/useradd/useradd-example.bb
 create mode 100644 meta-skeleton/recipes-skeleton/useradd/useradd-example/file1
 create mode 100644 meta-skeleton/recipes-skeleton/useradd/useradd-example/file2
 create mode 100644 meta-skeleton/recipes-skeleton/useradd/useradd-example/file3
 create mode 100644 meta-skeleton/recipes-skeleton/useradd/useradd-example/file4
 create mode 100644 meta/classes/useradd.bbclass
 create mode 100644 meta/recipes-core/base-passwd/base-passwd-3.5.22/login.defs
 create mode 100644 meta/recipes-core/base-passwd/base-passwd-cross_3.5.22.bb
 create mode 100644 meta/recipes-extended/shadow/files/add_root_cmd_options.patch
 create mode 100644 meta/recipes-extended/shadow/shadow-native_4.1.4.3.bb
 delete mode 100644 meta/recipes-extended/shadow/shadow.inc
Mark Hatle - May 31, 2011, 9:16 p.m.
On 5/31/11 2:57 PM, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 19:51, Scott Garman <scott.a.garman@intel.com> wrote:
>> That said, I have no idea what criteria should be used to determine which
>> list to send things to, and I'm sure I'm not the only one. Is this
>> documented anywhere?
> 
> It seems to me that poky list ought to be not used anymore and patches
> to be send to oe-core as AFAIK Yocto will base on it. Am I missing
> anything?
> 
> This is really confusing. This is not just regarding mailing lists but
> also IRC channels :-/
> 

As I understand it, the intention is the Poky list is used for Poky specific
items or to discuss (from a Poky specific point of view) oe-core items.. I.e.
problems, issues, etc from the usage of oe-core within the Poky use.

The confusion currently comes from many of the oe-core items used to live in the
Poky domain, and no longer due.  Unfortunately this will take a bit of education
for folks who don't contribute daily so that they know which mailing list to use.

(In otherwords the Poky list still has it's place, but only for Poky specific
discussions.)

--Mark
Richard Purdie - May 31, 2011, 9:25 p.m.
On Tue, 2011-05-31 at 12:51 -0700, Scott Garman wrote:
> On 05/31/2011 12:06 PM, Saul Wold wrote:
> > On 05/31/2011 11:45 AM, Koen Kooi wrote:
> >> Shouldn't patches like this be sent to the oe-core list? It wouldn't
> >> have saved me from the selinux bug in shadow, though :)
> >>
> > Scott,
> >
> > I would agree with Koen, this is a oe-core change, not a Poky only
> > change, please resend this request to the oe-core list.
> 
> Sure, I'll resend it to oe-core.
> 
> That said, I have no idea what criteria should be used to determine 
> which list to send things to, and I'm sure I'm not the only one. Is this 
> documented anywhere?

We're trying to make this simpler over time:

bitbake changes -> bitbake-devel
Any code in oe-core -> oe-core list
Anything in poky not in oe-core/bitbake -> poky list

Cheers,

Richard
Scott Garman - May 31, 2011, 9:27 p.m.
On 05/31/2011 02:16 PM, Mark Hatle wrote:
> On 5/31/11 2:57 PM, Otavio Salvador wrote:
>> On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 19:51, Scott Garman<scott.a.garman@intel.com>  wrote:
>>> That said, I have no idea what criteria should be used to determine which
>>> list to send things to, and I'm sure I'm not the only one. Is this
>>> documented anywhere?
>>
>> It seems to me that poky list ought to be not used anymore and patches
>> to be send to oe-core as AFAIK Yocto will base on it. Am I missing
>> anything?
>>
>> This is really confusing. This is not just regarding mailing lists but
>> also IRC channels :-/
>>
>
> As I understand it, the intention is the Poky list is used for Poky specific
> items or to discuss (from a Poky specific point of view) oe-core items.. I.e.
> problems, issues, etc from the usage of oe-core within the Poky use.
>
> The confusion currently comes from many of the oe-core items used to live in the
> Poky domain, and no longer due.  Unfortunately this will take a bit of education
> for folks who don't contribute daily so that they know which mailing list to use.
>
> (In otherwords the Poky list still has it's place, but only for Poky specific
> discussions.)

So presumably this would mean: if it's about a recipe that is not in 
OE-core, it's Poky-specific?

Which would also mean that discussion about anything in the bitbake 
classes belongs on OE-core as well, yes?

Scott
Richard Purdie - May 31, 2011, 9:51 p.m.
On Tue, 2011-05-31 at 14:27 -0700, Scott Garman wrote:
> So presumably this would mean: if it's about a recipe that is not in 
> OE-core, it's Poky-specific?

If its not bitbake and its not on OE-Core its poky specific.

> Which would also mean that discussion about anything in the bitbake 
> classes belongs on OE-core as well, yes?

Correct.

Cheers,

Richard