On Mon, Aug 4, 2014 at 8:19 PM, Paul Eggleton <paul.eggle...@linux.intel.com
> wrote:
> 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.
>
Ok. How about adding :
ROOTFS_POSTPROCESS_COMMAND += '${@base_contains("TOOLCHAIN_TARGET_TASK",
"packagegroup-core-boot", "add_machine_name_loop_back; ", "",d)}'
Again here the problem is that when packagegroup-core-boot will be added,
this change will be forced to rootfs :(
>
> Cheers,
> Paul
>
> --
>
> Paul Eggleton
> Intel Open Source Technology Centre
>
Thanks,
Sujith H
--
സുജിത് ഹരിദാസന്
Bangalore
<Project>Contributor to KDE project
http://fci.wikia.com/wiki/Anti-DRM-Campaign
<Blog> http://sujithh.info
--
_______________________________________________
Openembedded-core mailing list
Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
