On Wed, 2017-02-01 at 09:02 -0600, Leonardo Sandoval wrote: > > On 01/31/2017 05:16 PM, Richard Purdie wrote: > > On Tue, 2017-01-31 at 16:50 -0600, > > leonardo.sandoval.gonza...@linux.intel.com wrote: > >> From: Leonardo Sandoval <leonardo.sandoval.gonza...@linux.intel.com> > >> - bitbake("core-image-sato") > >> + bitbake("core-image-minimal") > >> # do_image will fail if there are any pending postinsts > > Whilst this is certainly going to be a touch faster, I believe we do > > want to test read only rootfs with a larger image like sato to make > > sure the postinsts really do work with a read only system? > > I don't get it. What would make the test different using a larger image?
The postinst of each component installed into the image must work properly in a read-only rootfs configuration. So the test is partly for image creation, partly for the components, and thus more comprehensive when using a larger image. -- 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. -- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core