| Message ID | 20220119030655.3484026-1-hongxu.jia@windriver.com |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
| Series | package_manager/rpm: conditional remove package manager database | expand |
Apologies, but please no. This adds complexity, isn't possible to disable and is difficult to understand. You can simply remove the unneeded files from ROOTFS_POSTPROCESS_COMMAND in your image class. Alex On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 at 04:07, hongxu <hongxu.jia@windriver.com> wrote: > In order to save spaces in target rootfs, the user wants to remove dnf and > keep rpm, in this situation, we should remove dnf database only > > If rpm was installed, keep rpm database, after applying this commit: > > Edit conf/local.conf > ... > IMAGE_FEATURES:remove = "package-management" > IMAGE_INSTALL:append= " rpm" > ... > > Build image and boot, run rpm -qa on target: > Without this commit > ... > root@intel-x86-64:~# rpm -qa | wc -l > 0 > ... > > Apply this commit > ... > root@intel-x86-64:~# rpm -qa | wc -l > 1865 > ... > > With this commit, the rpm -qa works as expected. > > It does not make sense to keep dnf and remove rpm, so this commit > does not consider the scenario > > Signed-off-by: Hongxu Jia <hongxu.jia@windriver.com> > --- > meta/lib/oe/package_manager/rpm/__init__.py | 9 +++++++-- > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/meta/lib/oe/package_manager/rpm/__init__.py > b/meta/lib/oe/package_manager/rpm/__init__.py > index b392581069..dce5912329 100644 > --- a/meta/lib/oe/package_manager/rpm/__init__.py > +++ b/meta/lib/oe/package_manager/rpm/__init__.py > @@ -80,7 +80,9 @@ class RpmPM(PackageManager): > self.saved_packaging_data = > self.d.expand('${T}/saved_packaging_data/%s' % self.task_name) > if not os.path.exists(self.d.expand('${T}/saved_packaging_data')): > bb.utils.mkdirhier(self.d.expand('${T}/saved_packaging_data')) > - self.packaging_data_dirs = ['etc/rpm', 'etc/rpmrc', 'etc/dnf', > 'var/lib/rpm', 'var/lib/dnf', 'var/cache/dnf'] > + self.packaging_data_rpm_dirs = ['etc/rpm', 'etc/rpmrc', > 'var/lib/rpm'] > + self.packaging_data_dnf_dirs = ['etc/dnf', 'var/lib/dnf', > 'var/cache/dnf'] > + self.packaging_data_dirs = self.packaging_data_rpm_dirs + > self.packaging_data_dnf_dirs > self.solution_manifest = self.d.expand('${T}/saved/%s_solution' % > self.task_name) > if not os.path.exists(self.d.expand('${T}/saved')): > @@ -237,8 +239,11 @@ class RpmPM(PackageManager): > self._invoke_dnf(["autoremove"]) > > def remove_packaging_data(self): > + remove_packaging_data_dirs = self.packaging_data_dnf_dirs > + if "rpm" not in self.list_installed(): > + remove_packaging_data_dirs += self.packaging_data_rpm_dirs > self._invoke_dnf(["clean", "all"]) > - for dir in self.packaging_data_dirs: > + for dir in remove_packaging_data_dirs: > bb.utils.remove(oe.path.join(self.target_rootfs, dir), True) > > def backup_packaging_data(self): > -- > 2.27.0 > > > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- > Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. > View/Reply Online (#160688): > https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/160688 > Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/88527238/1686489 > Group Owner: openembedded-core+owner@lists.openembedded.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/unsub [ > alex.kanavin@gmail.com] > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- > >
I am afraid doing remove operation in ROOTFS_POSTPROCESS_COMMAND could not satisfy this case The background is in order to save spaces in embedded device, user do not install package dnf which introduces python3, and use rpm to manage package on target In oe-core, the dnf, rpm and pkg database are introduced by package-management of IMAGE_FEATURES, if package-management in IMAGE_FEATURES, we could remove unused pkg data in ROOTFS_POSTPROCESS_COMMAND as you suggested, but we could not uninstall dnf and all related depend(such as python3) gracefully; if package-management not in IMAGE_FEATURES, the pkg data will be removed before ROOTFS_POSTPROCESS_COMMAND, that's why this commit are trying to resolve The root cause maybe dnf is too heavy for disk sensitive device //Hongxu
Hi,
We do exactly that in our images, keep rpm but avoid dnf. We do it by adding this to the image recipes (via in inc file).
ROOTFS_PKGMANAGE_remove = "dnf"
ROOTFS_POSTUNINSTALL_COMMAND += "spx_wipe_dnf_data ; "
spx_wipe_dnf_data() {
bbnote "Removing all dnf runtime data"
for d in /var/lib/dnf /var/cache/dnf; do
[ -d ${IMAGE_ROOTFS}$d ] || continue
dirsize=`du -ks ${IMAGE_ROOTFS}/$d | awk '{ print $1 }'`
bbnote "Removing $d with $dirsize KiB"
rm -rf ${IMAGE_ROOTFS}$d/*
done
}
I hope this helps
--
Diego Santa Cruz, PhD
Technology Architect
spinetix.com
From: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org <openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org> On Behalf Of hongxu via lists.openembedded.org
Sent: 20 January 2022 03:54
To: Alexander Kanavin <alex.kanavin@gmail.com>
Cc: OE-core <openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org>; Yang, Liezhi <Liezhi.Yang@windriver.com>
Subject: Re: [OE-core] [PATCH] package_manager/rpm: conditional remove package manager database
I am afraid doing remove operation in ROOTFS_POSTPROCESS_COMMAND could not satisfy this case
The background is in order to save spaces in embedded device, user do not install
package dnf which introduces python3, and use rpm to manage package on target
In oe-core, the dnf, rpm and pkg database are introduced by package-management of IMAGE_FEATURES,
if package-management in IMAGE_FEATURES, we could remove unused pkg data in
ROOTFS_POSTPROCESS_COMMAND as you suggested, but we could not uninstall
dnf and all related depend(such as python3) gracefully;
if package-management not in IMAGE_FEATURES, the pkg data will be removed
before ROOTFS_POSTPROCESS_COMMAND, that's why this commit are trying to resolve
The root cause maybe dnf is too heavy for disk sensitive device
//Hongxu
On 1/20/22 14:34, Diego Santa Cruz wrote:
[Please note: This e-mail is from an EXTERNAL e-mail address]
Hi,
We do exactly that in our images, keep rpm but avoid dnf. We do it by adding this to the image recipes (via in inc file).
ROOTFS_PKGMANAGE_remove = "dnf"
ROOTFS_POSTUNINSTALL_COMMAND += "spx_wipe_dnf_data ; "
spx_wipe_dnf_data() {
bbnote "Removing all dnf runtime data"
for d in /var/lib/dnf /var/cache/dnf; do
[ -d ${IMAGE_ROOTFS}$d ] || continue
dirsize=`du -ks ${IMAGE_ROOTFS}/$d | awk '{ print $1 }'`
bbnote "Removing $d with $dirsize KiB"
rm -rf ${IMAGE_ROOTFS}$d/*
done
}
Yes, it helps, thank you very much
//Hongxu
I hope this helps
--
Diego Santa Cruz, PhD
Technology Architect
spinetix.com<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://spinetix.com__;!!AjveYdw8EvQ!P_Qo8UNa9oH3Xr8z3HrU_xtzKsKiL3G0BxR5ApZ1zjZT1dhR0-6zDAqCXf8Cxd2SHbwc$>
From: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org<mailto:openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org> <openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org><mailto:openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org> On Behalf Of hongxu via lists.openembedded.org<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://lists.openembedded.org__;!!AjveYdw8EvQ!P_Qo8UNa9oH3Xr8z3HrU_xtzKsKiL3G0BxR5ApZ1zjZT1dhR0-6zDAqCXf8CxZKo62pc$>
Sent: 20 January 2022 03:54
To: Alexander Kanavin <alex.kanavin@gmail.com><mailto:alex.kanavin@gmail.com>
Cc: OE-core <openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org><mailto:openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org>; Yang, Liezhi <Liezhi.Yang@windriver.com><mailto:Liezhi.Yang@windriver.com>
Subject: Re: [OE-core] [PATCH] package_manager/rpm: conditional remove package manager database
I am afraid doing remove operation in ROOTFS_POSTPROCESS_COMMAND could not satisfy this case
The background is in order to save spaces in embedded device, user do not install
package dnf which introduces python3, and use rpm to manage package on target
In oe-core, the dnf, rpm and pkg database are introduced by package-management of IMAGE_FEATURES,
if package-management in IMAGE_FEATURES, we could remove unused pkg data in
ROOTFS_POSTPROCESS_COMMAND as you suggested, but we could not uninstall
dnf and all related depend(such as python3) gracefully;
if package-management not in IMAGE_FEATURES, the pkg data will be removed
before ROOTFS_POSTPROCESS_COMMAND, that's why this commit are trying to resolve
The root cause maybe dnf is too heavy for disk sensitive device
//Hongxu
I think we could address this properly by adding a 'package-database' image feature? Alex On Thu, 20 Jan 2022 at 09:39, Jia, Hongxu <Hongxu.Jia@windriver.com> wrote: > On 1/20/22 14:34, Diego Santa Cruz wrote: > > [Please note: This e-mail is from an EXTERNAL e-mail address] > > Hi, > > > > We do exactly that in our images, keep rpm but avoid dnf. We do it by > adding this to the image recipes (via in inc file). > > > > ROOTFS_PKGMANAGE_remove = "dnf" > > ROOTFS_POSTUNINSTALL_COMMAND += "spx_wipe_dnf_data ; " > > > > spx_wipe_dnf_data() { > > bbnote "Removing all dnf runtime data" > > for d in /var/lib/dnf /var/cache/dnf; do > > [ -d ${IMAGE_ROOTFS}$d ] || continue > > dirsize=`du -ks ${IMAGE_ROOTFS}/$d | awk '{ print $1 }'` > > bbnote "Removing $d with $dirsize KiB" > > rm -rf ${IMAGE_ROOTFS}$d/* > > done > > } > > > > > > Yes, it helps, thank you very much > > //Hongxu > > I hope this helps > > > > -- > > *Diego Santa Cruz, PhD *Technology Architect > spinetix.com > <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://spinetix.com__;!!AjveYdw8EvQ!P_Qo8UNa9oH3Xr8z3HrU_xtzKsKiL3G0BxR5ApZ1zjZT1dhR0-6zDAqCXf8Cxd2SHbwc$> > > > > *From:* openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org > <openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org> > <openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org> *On Behalf Of *hongxu via > lists.openembedded.org > <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://lists.openembedded.org__;!!AjveYdw8EvQ!P_Qo8UNa9oH3Xr8z3HrU_xtzKsKiL3G0BxR5ApZ1zjZT1dhR0-6zDAqCXf8CxZKo62pc$> > *Sent:* 20 January 2022 03:54 > *To:* Alexander Kanavin <alex.kanavin@gmail.com> <alex.kanavin@gmail.com> > *Cc:* OE-core <openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org> > <openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org>; Yang, Liezhi > <Liezhi.Yang@windriver.com> <Liezhi.Yang@windriver.com> > *Subject:* Re: [OE-core] [PATCH] package_manager/rpm: conditional remove > package manager database > > > > I am afraid doing remove operation in ROOTFS_POSTPROCESS_COMMAND could not > satisfy this case > > > > The background is in order to save spaces in embedded device, user do not > install > > package dnf which introduces python3, and use rpm to manage package on > target > > > > In oe-core, the dnf, rpm and pkg database are introduced by > package-management of IMAGE_FEATURES, > > if package-management in IMAGE_FEATURES, we could remove unused pkg data in > > ROOTFS_POSTPROCESS_COMMAND as you suggested, but we could not uninstall > > dnf and all related depend(such as python3) gracefully; > > if package-management not in IMAGE_FEATURES, the pkg data will be removed > > before ROOTFS_POSTPROCESS_COMMAND, that's why this commit are trying to > resolve > > > > The root cause maybe dnf is too heavy for disk sensitive device > > > > //Hongxu > > > ------------------------------ > > *From:* Alexander Kanavin <alex.kanavin@gmail.com> > *Sent:* Wednesday, January 19, 2022 6:15 PM > *To:* Jia, Hongxu <Hongxu.Jia@windriver.com> > *Cc:* OE-core <openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org>; Yang, Liezhi < > Liezhi.Yang@windriver.com> > *Subject:* Re: [OE-core] [PATCH] package_manager/rpm: conditional remove > package manager database > > > > [Please note: This e-mail is from an EXTERNAL e-mail address] > > Apologies, but please no. This adds complexity, isn't possible to disable > and is difficult to understand. You can simply remove the unneeded files > from ROOTFS_POSTPROCESS_COMMAND in your image class. > > > > Alex > > > > On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 at 04:07, hongxu <hongxu.jia@windriver.com> wrote: > > In order to save spaces in target rootfs, the user wants to remove dnf and > keep rpm, in this situation, we should remove dnf database only > > If rpm was installed, keep rpm database, after applying this commit: > > Edit conf/local.conf > ... > IMAGE_FEATURES:remove = "package-management" > IMAGE_INSTALL:append= " rpm" > ... > > Build image and boot, run rpm -qa on target: > Without this commit > ... > root@intel-x86-64:~# rpm -qa | wc -l > 0 > ... > > Apply this commit > ... > root@intel-x86-64:~# rpm -qa | wc -l > 1865 > ... > > With this commit, the rpm -qa works as expected. > > It does not make sense to keep dnf and remove rpm, so this commit > does not consider the scenario > > Signed-off-by: Hongxu Jia <hongxu.jia@windriver.com> > --- > meta/lib/oe/package_manager/rpm/__init__.py > <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https*3A*2F*2Furldefense.com*2Fv3*2F__http*3A*2F*2F__init__.py__*3B!!AjveYdw8EvQ!JHTMzGi0-aiMoNjIt7Jb186B-p8VNKpv_Yrm-v87Li0GFTZf07eaSBP1gIDKvdp1Putv*24&data=04*7C01*7Cdiego.santacruz*40spinetix.com*7Ccfe2bf45c56e4efe23b608d9dbc02521*7C5f4034faed2d4840a93facb1e9633b93*7C0*7C0*7C637782440578878242*7CUnknown*7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0*3D*7C3000&sdata=i0*2B51iSlYuayK9kClXpEUxk*2FhpzlSMHHkNLpa7*2BDSWc*3D&reserved=0__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSU!!AjveYdw8EvQ!P_Qo8UNa9oH3Xr8z3HrU_xtzKsKiL3G0BxR5ApZ1zjZT1dhR0-6zDAqCXf8Cxamel_UX$> > | 9 +++++++-- > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/meta/lib/oe/package_manager/rpm/__init__.py > <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https*3A*2F*2Furldefense.com*2Fv3*2F__http*3A*2F*2F__init__.py__*3B!!AjveYdw8EvQ!JHTMzGi0-aiMoNjIt7Jb186B-p8VNKpv_Yrm-v87Li0GFTZf07eaSBP1gIDKvdp1Putv*24&data=04*7C01*7Cdiego.santacruz*40spinetix.com*7Ccfe2bf45c56e4efe23b608d9dbc02521*7C5f4034faed2d4840a93facb1e9633b93*7C0*7C0*7C637782440578878242*7CUnknown*7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0*3D*7C3000&sdata=i0*2B51iSlYuayK9kClXpEUxk*2FhpzlSMHHkNLpa7*2BDSWc*3D&reserved=0__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSU!!AjveYdw8EvQ!P_Qo8UNa9oH3Xr8z3HrU_xtzKsKiL3G0BxR5ApZ1zjZT1dhR0-6zDAqCXf8Cxamel_UX$> > b/meta/lib/oe/package_manager/rpm/__init__.py > <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https*3A*2F*2Furldefense.com*2Fv3*2F__http*3A*2F*2F__init__.py__*3B!!AjveYdw8EvQ!JHTMzGi0-aiMoNjIt7Jb186B-p8VNKpv_Yrm-v87Li0GFTZf07eaSBP1gIDKvdp1Putv*24&data=04*7C01*7Cdiego.santacruz*40spinetix.com*7Ccfe2bf45c56e4efe23b608d9dbc02521*7C5f4034faed2d4840a93facb1e9633b93*7C0*7C0*7C637782440578878242*7CUnknown*7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0*3D*7C3000&sdata=i0*2B51iSlYuayK9kClXpEUxk*2FhpzlSMHHkNLpa7*2BDSWc*3D&reserved=0__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSU!!AjveYdw8EvQ!P_Qo8UNa9oH3Xr8z3HrU_xtzKsKiL3G0BxR5ApZ1zjZT1dhR0-6zDAqCXf8Cxamel_UX$> > index b392581069..dce5912329 100644 > --- a/meta/lib/oe/package_manager/rpm/__init__.py > <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https*3A*2F*2Furldefense.com*2Fv3*2F__http*3A*2F*2F__init__.py__*3B!!AjveYdw8EvQ!JHTMzGi0-aiMoNjIt7Jb186B-p8VNKpv_Yrm-v87Li0GFTZf07eaSBP1gIDKvdp1Putv*24&data=04*7C01*7Cdiego.santacruz*40spinetix.com*7Ccfe2bf45c56e4efe23b608d9dbc02521*7C5f4034faed2d4840a93facb1e9633b93*7C0*7C0*7C637782440578878242*7CUnknown*7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0*3D*7C3000&sdata=i0*2B51iSlYuayK9kClXpEUxk*2FhpzlSMHHkNLpa7*2BDSWc*3D&reserved=0__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSU!!AjveYdw8EvQ!P_Qo8UNa9oH3Xr8z3HrU_xtzKsKiL3G0BxR5ApZ1zjZT1dhR0-6zDAqCXf8Cxamel_UX$> > +++ b/meta/lib/oe/package_manager/rpm/__init__.py > <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https*3A*2F*2Furldefense.com*2Fv3*2F__http*3A*2F*2F__init__.py__*3B!!AjveYdw8EvQ!JHTMzGi0-aiMoNjIt7Jb186B-p8VNKpv_Yrm-v87Li0GFTZf07eaSBP1gIDKvdp1Putv*24&data=04*7C01*7Cdiego.santacruz*40spinetix.com*7Ccfe2bf45c56e4efe23b608d9dbc02521*7C5f4034faed2d4840a93facb1e9633b93*7C0*7C0*7C637782440578878242*7CUnknown*7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0*3D*7C3000&sdata=i0*2B51iSlYuayK9kClXpEUxk*2FhpzlSMHHkNLpa7*2BDSWc*3D&reserved=0__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSU!!AjveYdw8EvQ!P_Qo8UNa9oH3Xr8z3HrU_xtzKsKiL3G0BxR5ApZ1zjZT1dhR0-6zDAqCXf8Cxamel_UX$> > @@ -80,7 +80,9 @@ class RpmPM(PackageManager): > self.saved_packaging_data = > self.d.expand('${T}/saved_packaging_data/%s' % self.task_name) > if not os.path.exists(self.d.expand('${T}/saved_packaging_data')): > bb.utils.mkdirhier(self.d.expand('${T}/saved_packaging_data')) > - self.packaging_data_dirs = ['etc/rpm', 'etc/rpmrc', 'etc/dnf', > 'var/lib/rpm', 'var/lib/dnf', 'var/cache/dnf'] > + self.packaging_data_rpm_dirs = ['etc/rpm', 'etc/rpmrc', > 'var/lib/rpm'] > + self.packaging_data_dnf_dirs = ['etc/dnf', 'var/lib/dnf', > 'var/cache/dnf'] > + self.packaging_data_dirs = self.packaging_data_rpm_dirs + > self.packaging_data_dnf_dirs > self.solution_manifest = self.d.expand('${T}/saved/%s_solution' % > self.task_name) > if not os.path.exists(self.d.expand('${T}/saved')): > @@ -237,8 +239,11 @@ class RpmPM(PackageManager): > self._invoke_dnf(["autoremove"]) > > def remove_packaging_data(self): > + remove_packaging_data_dirs = self.packaging_data_dnf_dirs > + if "rpm" not in self.list_installed(): > + remove_packaging_data_dirs += self.packaging_data_rpm_dirs > self._invoke_dnf(["clean", "all"]) > - for dir in self.packaging_data_dirs: > + for dir in remove_packaging_data_dirs: > bb.utils.remove(oe.path.join(self.target_rootfs, dir), True) > > def backup_packaging_data(self): > -- > 2.27.0 > > > > >
diff --git a/meta/lib/oe/package_manager/rpm/__init__.py b/meta/lib/oe/package_manager/rpm/__init__.py index b392581069..dce5912329 100644 --- a/meta/lib/oe/package_manager/rpm/__init__.py +++ b/meta/lib/oe/package_manager/rpm/__init__.py @@ -80,7 +80,9 @@ class RpmPM(PackageManager): self.saved_packaging_data = self.d.expand('${T}/saved_packaging_data/%s' % self.task_name) if not os.path.exists(self.d.expand('${T}/saved_packaging_data')): bb.utils.mkdirhier(self.d.expand('${T}/saved_packaging_data')) - self.packaging_data_dirs = ['etc/rpm', 'etc/rpmrc', 'etc/dnf', 'var/lib/rpm', 'var/lib/dnf', 'var/cache/dnf'] + self.packaging_data_rpm_dirs = ['etc/rpm', 'etc/rpmrc', 'var/lib/rpm'] + self.packaging_data_dnf_dirs = ['etc/dnf', 'var/lib/dnf', 'var/cache/dnf'] + self.packaging_data_dirs = self.packaging_data_rpm_dirs + self.packaging_data_dnf_dirs self.solution_manifest = self.d.expand('${T}/saved/%s_solution' % self.task_name) if not os.path.exists(self.d.expand('${T}/saved')): @@ -237,8 +239,11 @@ class RpmPM(PackageManager): self._invoke_dnf(["autoremove"]) def remove_packaging_data(self): + remove_packaging_data_dirs = self.packaging_data_dnf_dirs + if "rpm" not in self.list_installed(): + remove_packaging_data_dirs += self.packaging_data_rpm_dirs self._invoke_dnf(["clean", "all"]) - for dir in self.packaging_data_dirs: + for dir in remove_packaging_data_dirs: bb.utils.remove(oe.path.join(self.target_rootfs, dir), True) def backup_packaging_data(self):
In order to save spaces in target rootfs, the user wants to remove dnf and keep rpm, in this situation, we should remove dnf database only If rpm was installed, keep rpm database, after applying this commit: Edit conf/local.conf ... IMAGE_FEATURES:remove = "package-management" IMAGE_INSTALL:append= " rpm" ... Build image and boot, run rpm -qa on target: Without this commit ... root@intel-x86-64:~# rpm -qa | wc -l 0 ... Apply this commit ... root@intel-x86-64:~# rpm -qa | wc -l 1865 ... With this commit, the rpm -qa works as expected. It does not make sense to keep dnf and remove rpm, so this commit does not consider the scenario Signed-off-by: Hongxu Jia <hongxu.jia@windriver.com> --- meta/lib/oe/package_manager/rpm/__init__.py | 9 +++++++-- 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)