| Summary: | testimage/testexport: support permissions and attributes for package installation | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [QA/Testing] Runtime Testing | Reporter: | Mariano Lopez <mariano.lopez> |
| Component: | general | Assignee: | Unassigned <unassigned> |
| Status: | RESOLVED OBSOLETE | QA Contact: | |
| Severity: | enhancement | ||
| Priority: | Medium | CC: | joshuagloe, leonardo.sandoval.gonzalez, randy.macleod, sgw |
| Version: | 5.99 | ||
| Target Milestone: | Future | ||
| Hardware: | x86 | ||
| OS: | Multiple | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| OS type for building Yocto: | --- | Type of Regression: | --- |
| Verified: | Documentation change: | Yes (doc changes required) | |
|
Description
Mariano Lopez
2016-06-29 13:02:49 UTC
busybox's tar doesn't have options to preserve owner, permission or attributes, therefore we need to provide a tar binary. I know we talked about rsync before but I can't recall whether you tested it? The rsync man page[1] says that rsync can: "can copy locally, to/from another host over any remote shell, or to/from a remote rsync daemon" 1. http://manpages.ubuntu.com/manpages/precise/en/man1/rsync.1.html (In reply to comment #2) > I know we talked about rsync before but I can't recall whether you tested it? > I haven't tested it yet, the issue with rsync was that we needed to provide the binary in the target, but now we need to provide tar, so rsync becomes a viable option again. I'll try rsync next. (In reply to comment #3) > (In reply to comment #2) > > I know we talked about rsync before but I can't recall whether you tested it? > > > > I haven't tested it yet, the issue with rsync was that we needed to provide > the binary in the target, but now we need to provide tar, so rsync becomes a > viable option again. I'll try rsync next. My understanding of the manpage is that the binary shouldn't be required on the target, because rsync can copy "to/from another host over any remote shell" — thus I'd expect if we have rsync-native on the host we can rsync to the target. (In reply to comment #4) > My understanding of the manpage is that the binary shouldn't be required on > the target, because rsync can copy "to/from another host over any remote > shell" — thus I'd expect if we have rsync-native on the host we can rsync to > the target. I tested that, you need rsync in both hosts unfortunately, the enhancement window is over, so moving it to 2.5. is this something we still need to test? This doesn't seem to be a problem in our current workflow. Reopen if it becomes one. |