> -----Original Message----- > From: Dmytriyenko, Denys > Sent: Thursday, February 05, 2015 10:49 AM > To: Cooper Jr., Franklin > Cc: Hernandez, Carlos; [email protected] > Subject: Re: [meta-arago] [PATCH] busybox/defconfig: Enable options required > by LAVA > > On Thu, Feb 05, 2015 at 10:59:24AM -0500, Cooper Jr., Franklin wrote: > > > On Feb 5, 2015, at 9:52 AM, Dmytriyenko, Denys <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> On Thu, Feb 05, 2015 at 10:47:16AM -0500, Cooper Jr., Franklin wrote: > > >>>> On Feb 5, 2015, at 9:14 AM, Dmytriyenko, Denys <[email protected]> > wrote: > > >>>> > > >>>> On Thu, Feb 05, 2015 at 10:02:33AM -0500, Carlos Hernandez wrote: > > >>>> Linaro's Test Framework (LAVA) requires httpd and other options > > >>>> enabled in busybox. Enable them so LAVA tests can be run on Arago > > >>>> images. > > >>> > > >>> Looks good. The only concern I have is below. > > >> > > >> Carlos, > > >> Do we really need another web server? > > >> We have lighttpd and thttpd already. Can either of those be reused > > >> especially thttpd since it's already a light weight web server. > > > > > > I guess this question would need to be directed to LAVA guys. Not > > > sure if their build includes any of those other http servers, hence > > > they enabled the simplest one. > > > > > > We do indeed already have 2 http servers, and yes it would be nice > > > to re-use one of them instead of enabling 3rd one. But the question > > > is - who will validate and, if needed, update corresponding LAVA pieces to > work with thttpd? > > > Let me check how we currently use thttpd. I wouldn't mind replacing it > > with httpd if possible instead of adding a third web server. > > I don't believe we actively use thttpd any more. It was added way back to > Classic Arago to support DVSDK and running cgi scripts as root: > > http://arago- > project.org/git/?p=arago.git;a=commit;h=f8bf614c85f435f53a78a0151b239341 > 643f6a13 > > I'd vote to kill it. [Franklin] I've wanted to kill it for a while but I was told that customers frequently asked for a very lightweight web server so we kept it there to show it off. Other than documentation I don't think we refer to thttpd in our sdk. > > > > >>>> Signed-off-by: Carlos Hernandez <[email protected]> > > >>>> --- > > >>>> meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/busybox/busybox/defconfig | 12 > > >>>> ++++++------ > > >>>> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) > > >>>> > > >>>> -# CONFIG_HTTPD is not set > > >>>> +CONFIG_HTTPD=y > > >>>> # CONFIG_FEATURE_HTTPD_RANGES is not set # > > >>>> CONFIG_FEATURE_HTTPD_USE_SENDFILE is not set # > > >>>> CONFIG_FEATURE_HTTPD_SETUID is not set @@ -845,7 +845,7 @@ > > >>>> CONFIG_UDHCP_DEBUG=0 # CONFIG_FEATURE_UDHCP_8021Q is not > set > > >>>> CONFIG_UDHCPC_DEFAULT_SCRIPT="/usr/share/udhcpc/default.script" > > >>>> CONFIG_UDHCPC_SLACK_FOR_BUGGY_SERVERS=80 > > >>>> -CONFIG_IFUPDOWN_UDHCPC_CMD_OPTIONS="-R -n" > > >>>> +CONFIG_IFUPDOWN_UDHCPC_CMD_OPTIONS="-R -b" > > >>> > > >>> This supposedly changes udhcp behavior to go into background when > > >>> waiting for an IP address, if not received right away, instead of > > >>> exiting > with an error. > > >>> I personally don't have an issue with this, but will it affect SDK > > >>> OOB experience in any way? Guys? > > > > > >> I'll double check but why instead of changing the default behavior > > >> simply add &? I'm assuming you will get the same result but won't > > >> have to worry about breaking anything. > > > > > > That's still not the same - with -n flag udhcp will time out soon if > > > not received IP address, while with -b it will go into background > > > and will wait for IP address there. So, if you add & at the end of > > > command with -n it will go into background, but exit soon after, which is > > > not > the same. > > > > > So it sits indefinitely and assigns ip's whenever it can? If so I > > would actual prefer that. I still need to check. > > Yes, it is my understanding that it will keep on pinging the server with > request- > IP periodically in the background, until it gets one. > > The current behaviour is it tries 3 times and if it can't get an IP, it exits > with > error. > > In both cases, once the IP is acquired, the client has to stay in the > background > for renewing the lease. The difference is the initial acquision. [Franklin] This change will cause problems for one of our scripts. Since we are extremely close to our release I would prefer if we hold off on making this change. Wed of next week would be prefect if yall don't mind waiting. I'll update the scripts at that point to reflect this change.
I don't see a command to manually change this behavior to mimic how it currently works once this change is made. So if such a command/option does exist then I probably can fix the scripts real quick to make that change. > > -- > Denys _______________________________________________ meta-arago mailing list [email protected] http://arago-project.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/meta-arago
