8397 2015-09-25 10:35:19 +0000 ROOTLESS_X should be used as default for Poky BSP 2016-06-09 15:44:34 +0000 1 1 7 Build System, Metadata & Runtime BSPs bsps-configuration unspecified x86 Multiple RESOLVED NOTABUG Medium normal 2.2 M1 1 jku alejandro.hernandez benjamin.esquivel richard.purdie ross.burton sgw yp.bsp.watcher yp.watcher --- Regression (Used to work) Don't know oldest_to_newest 54660 0 jku 2015-09-25 10:35:19 +0000 Filing this based on chat discussion with Ross, Richard. Currently no meta-intel bsp uses ROOTLESS_X to run X as "xuser" instead of root. This should be done where possible (and obviously bugs preventing it should be fixed). 54916 1 sgw 2015-10-01 21:23:45 +0000 Currently we don't enable ROOTLESS_X by default in Poky (the Yocto Project Distro) at all, so why should we make a policy decision to enable ROOTLESS_X for meta-intel specifically, this would mean different BSPs have different distro policies. The enabling of ROOTLESS_X should be done at a Distro Level not BSP level. Are there specific issues that need to be addressed? I just completed a ROOTLESS_X = "1" build and booted with no issues. I guess I would like to understand the background of the discussion that was had with Ross and Richard. 54932 2 jku 2015-10-02 11:51:57 +0000 (In reply to comment #1) > Are there specific issues that need to be addressed? I just completed a > ROOTLESS_X = "1" build and booted with no issues. If we don't test it then it will be broken. If not now, then later. The last use of ROOTLESS_X in meta-intel I can find was in fact removed because it broke X. > I guess I would like to understand the background of the discussion that was > had with Ross and Richard. This was a short discussion on connman that was changing the build based on ROOTLESS_X quite needlessly: as an offshoot of that it was discovered that nothing actually tests ROOTLESS_X anymore. This was seen as Bad Thing so I promised to file a bug so we don't forget. The impression that it should be a bsp-specific decision was mine and could very well be wrong: I just knew that's how it was done before. 62837 3 alejandro.hernandez 2016-06-09 15:44:34 +0000 (In reply to comment #1) > Currently we don't enable ROOTLESS_X by default in Poky (the Yocto Project > Distro) at all, so why should we make a policy decision to enable ROOTLESS_X > for meta-intel specifically, this would mean different BSPs have different > distro policies. > > The enabling of ROOTLESS_X should be done at a Distro Level not BSP level. > > Are there specific issues that need to be addressed? I just completed a > ROOTLESS_X = "1" build and booted with no issues. > > I guess I would like to understand the background of the discussion that was > had with Ross and Richard. After some discussion, it was decided that this should be done at a Distro level, as Saul was stating, so I am closing this.