<div dir="ltr">Hi Paul,<br><div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Aug 4, 2014 at 7:48 PM, Paul Eggleton <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com" target="_blank">paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">Hi Sujith,<br>
<div><div class="h5"><br>
On Monday 04 August 2014 19:27:08 Sujith H wrote:<br>
> From: Sujith H <<a href="mailto:Sujith_Haridasan@mentor.com">Sujith_Haridasan@mentor.com</a>><br>
><br>
> If hostname is not added to /etc/hosts file then rpcinfo<br>
> command fails when hostname is passed as argument. This was<br>
> observed when rpcinfo command was tested on freescale target.<br>
> Below was the output observed without this change.<br>
><br>
> root@mx6q:~# rpcinfo -s mx6q<br>
> rpcinfo: can't contact rpcbind: RPC: (unknown error code)<br>
><br>
> Below is the output after this change:<br>
> root@mx6q:~# rpcinfo -s mx6q<br>
> program version(s) netid(s) service owner<br>
> 100000 2,3,4 local,udp,tcp,udp6,tcp6 portmapper superuser<br>
> root@mx6q:~#<br>
><br>
> Signed-off-by: Sujith H <<a href="mailto:Sujith_Haridasan@mentor.com">Sujith_Haridasan@mentor.com</a>><br>
> ---<br>
> meta/classes/image.bbclass | 8 ++++++++<br>
> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)<br>
><br>
> diff --git a/meta/classes/image.bbclass b/meta/classes/image.bbclass<br>
> index 82605f2..7a5a5c1 100644<br>
> --- a/meta/classes/image.bbclass<br>
> +++ b/meta/classes/image.bbclass<br>
> @@ -341,6 +341,14 @@ ssh_disable_dns_lookup () {<br>
> fi<br>
> }<br>
><br>
> +ROOTFS_POSTPROCESS_COMMAND += "add_machine_name_loop_back;"<br>
> +<br>
> +add_machine_name_loop_back() {<br>
> + if [ -n ${MACHINE} ]; then<br>
> + echo 127.0.1.1 " "${MACHINE} >><br>
> ${IMAGE_ROOTFS}${sysconfdir}/hosts + fi<br>
> +}<br>
> +<br>
<br>
</div></div>I think in the earlier discussion the conclusion was that we do not want this<br>
enabled by default, which the above will do.<br>
<br>
The question I have is, if this isn't a good idea, is there a better solution?<br>
<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I totally agree with the discussion. Is it a good idea to implement like check made for zap_empty_root_password? <br></div><div>For zap_empty_root_password there is a conditional check if debug-tweaks are enabled then zap_empty_root_password is<br>
</div><div>called. So can I use debug-tweaks to handle add_machine_name_loop_back in the patch? <br></div><div><br><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
Cheers,<br>
Paul<br>
<span class=""><font color="#888888"><br>
--<br>
<br>
Paul Eggleton<br>
Intel Open Source Technology Centre<br>
</font></span></blockquote></div><br></div><div class="gmail_extra">Thanks,<br><br></div><div class="gmail_extra">Sujith H<br clear="all"></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br>-- <br>സുജിത് ഹരിദാസന്<br>Bangalore<br><Project>Contributor to KDE project<br>
<a href="http://fci.wikia.com/wiki/Anti-DRM-Campaign" target="_blank">http://fci.wikia.com/wiki/Anti-DRM-Campaign</a><br><Blog> <a href="http://sujithh.info" target="_blank">http://sujithh.info</a><br>
</div></div></div>