[OE-core] [PATCH 0/4] Systemd Upgrade

[Richard Purdie]

On Mon, 2015-09-07 at 13:53 -0700, Khem Raj wrote:
> > On Sep 7, 2015, at 12:26 PM, Richard Purdie <richard.purdie at linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> > 
> > On Sun, 2015-09-06 at 15:25 +0000, Khem Raj wrote:
> >> Changes Since last time
> >> - Now that 225 is out upgrade recipe to 225, changes between 224 and 225 are minor
> >>  but fixes in networkd are important
> >> - Implement systemd-sysv-install for OE
> >> - Enable getopt in busybox needed for systemd-sysv-install
> >> - Remove update-rc.d from default uninstall list in rootfs creation
> >> - Tested date and systemd unit tests manually to pass
> >> - Booted core-image-cmdline-full on all qemu targets
> > 
> > https://autobuilder.yoctoproject.org/main/builders/nightly-qa-systemd/builds/480
> > 
> > The date test failed in two of the sanity runs with this series
> > applied :(
> 
> I think this testcase needs revisiting. My manual runs of sequence of
> exact same commands on qemux86-64 and qemuarm64 succeeds all the time.
> I have built core-image-full-cmdline
> One thing I wonder is if in AB case there might network time is
> configured and systemd-timesyncd/systemd-timedated syncs it back
> immediately when its tempered with. I see this happening with
> systemd-219 as well when I have networkd and timesyncd started on
> another instance running on minnow ( without the proposed patchset)
> 
> and for systemd we should try to test timedatectl to manipulate date
> instead of date cmd e.g. timedatectl set-time “YYYY-MM-DD HH:MM:SS”
> 
> I will try to reproduce it on my end and see if I can get something to
> whats going on.

A "bitbake core-image-sato -c testimage" replicated it here FWIW, have
you tried testimage to see if that somehow makes a difference? Shoudn't
be hard to test with that and for sato, it should run pretty quickly.

It all works with 219, its only the upgrade patches that seem to break
things :(

Cheers,

Richard