On Monday 04 August 2014 20:03:09 sujith h wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
>
> On Mon, Aug 4, 2014 at 7:48 PM, Paul Eggleton <paul.eggle...@linux.intel.com
> > wrote:
> >
> > Hi Sujith,
> >
> > On Monday 04 August 2014 19:27:08 Sujith H wrote:
> > > From: Sujith H <sujith_harida...@mentor.com>
> > >
> > > If hostname is not added to /etc/hosts file then rpcinfo
> > > command fails when hostname is passed as argument. This was
> > > observed when rpcinfo command was tested on freescale target.
> > > Below was the output observed without this change.
> > >
> > > root@mx6q:~# rpcinfo -s mx6q
> > > rpcinfo: can't contact rpcbind: RPC: (unknown error code)
> > >
> > > Below is the output after this change:
> > > root@mx6q:~# rpcinfo -s mx6q
> > >
> > > program version(s) netid(s) service owner
> > >
> > > 100000 2,3,4 local,udp,tcp,udp6,tcp6 portmapper
> >
> > superuser
> >
> > > root@mx6q:~#
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Sujith H <sujith_harida...@mentor.com>
> > > ---
> > >
> > > meta/classes/image.bbclass | 8 ++++++++
> > > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/meta/classes/image.bbclass b/meta/classes/image.bbclass
> > > index 82605f2..7a5a5c1 100644
> > > --- a/meta/classes/image.bbclass
> > > +++ b/meta/classes/image.bbclass
> > > @@ -341,6 +341,14 @@ ssh_disable_dns_lookup () {
> > >
> > > fi
> > >
> > > }
> > >
> > > +ROOTFS_POSTPROCESS_COMMAND += "add_machine_name_loop_back;"
> > > +
> > > +add_machine_name_loop_back() {
> > > + if [ -n ${MACHINE} ]; then
> > > + echo 127.0.1.1 " "${MACHINE} >>
> > > ${IMAGE_ROOTFS}${sysconfdir}/hosts + fi
> > > +}
> > > +
> >
> > I think in the earlier discussion the conclusion was that we do not want
> > this
> > enabled by default, which the above will do.
> >
> > The question I have is, if this isn't a good idea, is there a better
> > solution?
>
> I totally agree with the discussion. Is it a good idea to implement like
> check made for zap_empty_root_password?
> For zap_empty_root_password there is a conditional check if debug-tweaks
> are enabled then zap_empty_root_password is
> called. So can I use debug-tweaks to handle add_machine_name_loop_back in
> the patch?
No, that would not be right - debug-tweaks is for a specific purpose which is
unrelated to this.
Cheers,
Paul
--
Paul Eggleton
Intel Open Source Technology Centre
--
_______________________________________________
Openembedded-core mailing list
Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
