[Dev] Gumd usage in building images
imran.zaman at intel.com
Fri Oct 17 14:14:17 GMT 2014
I agree with patrick, and consequently:
In order to make life easier, I have added "offline" support in gumd, which means that gumd can be run as simple binary to add/del/update/get user/group.
No (p2p) dbus is needed.
offline mode: user will be added and gumd will exit immediately
# gumd -o -a --username=user1 --usertype=4 (e.g.)
non-offline mode (it needs either p2p dbus or system bus):
The changes have already been merged and pushed to tizen, and should show up in next Tizen common release (hopefully on monday).
Please make sure that you use gumd with version 0.0.6.
Roman, please test user creation at image level with gumd 0.0.6 and let me know if you face any issues.
From: Dev [dev-bounces at lists.tizen.org] on behalf of Patrick Ohly [patrick.ohly at intel.com]
Sent: 17 October 2014 10:37
To: dev at lists.tizen.org
Subject: Re: [Dev] Gumd usage in building images
On Fri, 2014-10-17 at 09:18 +0200, Dominig ar Foll (Intel OTC) wrote:
> when looking at off line mode (use during image creation) remember that
> we have a fast growing community planing to use Yocto and so your
> solution needs to work with Yocto as well.
For those not familiar with Yocto, some background:
* Tools manipulating the root filesystem typically get compiled
for the host system (for example, your Intel-based laptop
running some Linux distro) and then get invoked to modify files
used in the target (for example, ARM). Make sure that your files
don't have architecture dependencies (LSB vs. MSB, 32 vs 64).
* If that's not possible, tools are run under qemu.
* chroot is not used (because it would require root privileges),
so tools need to support manipulating files not at their final
destination (for example, tmp/sysroot/usr/ instead of /usr).
* The environment prepared for the tools only consists of env
variables. There's no concept of spawning additional daemons
(doesn't matter whether it's dbus-daemon or gumd).
For gumd, a mode where the client tool embeds the daemon code directly
would be the best solution IMHO. A --sysroot parameter similar to gcc
would probably be useful/needed, too.
Best Regards, Patrick Ohly
The content of this message is my personal opinion only and although
I am an employee of Intel, the statements I make here in no way
represent Intel's position on the issue, nor am I authorized to speak
on behalf of Intel on this matter.
Dev mailing list
Dev at lists.tizen.org
Intel Finland Oy
Registered Address: PL 281, 00181 Helsinki
Business Identity Code: 0357606 - 4
Domiciled in Helsinki
This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential material for
the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any review or distribution
by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended
recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies.
More information about the Dev