[oe] [meta-oe][PATCH] minicoredumper: fixes for sysvinit and systemd

[Anuj Mittal]

On 05/16/2018 02:05 AM, Pierre-Jean TEXIER wrote:
> The sysv initscript and systemd service assumes minicoredumper is
> installed in /usr/bin/. In our case minicoredumper is installed in
> /usr/sbin/ by default. Therefore, fix this path.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Pierre-Jean TEXIER <texier.pj2 at gmail.com>
> ---
>  meta-oe/recipes-kernel/minicoredumper/files/minicoredumper.init    | 2 +-
>  meta-oe/recipes-kernel/minicoredumper/files/minicoredumper.service | 2 +-
>  2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/meta-oe/recipes-kernel/minicoredumper/files/minicoredumper.init b/meta-oe/recipes-kernel/minicoredumper/files/minicoredumper.init
> index 90ef7fa..9c96e31 100644
> --- a/meta-oe/recipes-kernel/minicoredumper/files/minicoredumper.init
> +++ b/meta-oe/recipes-kernel/minicoredumper/files/minicoredumper.init
> @@ -22,7 +22,7 @@
>  
>  case "$1" in
>      start)
> -        echo "|/usr/bin/minicoredumper %p %u %g %s %t %h %e" > /proc/sys/kernel/core_pattern
> +        echo "|/usr/sbin/minicoredumper %p %u %g %s %t %h %e" > /proc/sys/kernel/core_pattern
>          ;;
>      stop)
>          echo "core" > /proc/sys/kernel/core_pattern
> diff --git a/meta-oe/recipes-kernel/minicoredumper/files/minicoredumper.service b/meta-oe/recipes-kernel/minicoredumper/files/minicoredumper.service
> index 851b54c..45d098f 100644
> --- a/meta-oe/recipes-kernel/minicoredumper/files/minicoredumper.service
> +++ b/meta-oe/recipes-kernel/minicoredumper/files/minicoredumper.service
> @@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ Description=Enable minicoredumper.
>  [Service]
>  Type=oneshot
>  RemainAfterExit=yes
> -ExecStart=/bin/sh -c '/bin/echo "|/usr/bin/minicoredumper %%p %%u %%g %%s %%t %%h %%e" > /proc/sys/kernel/core_pattern'
> +ExecStart=/bin/sh -c '/bin/echo "|/usr/sbin/minicoredumper %%p %%u %%g %%s %%t %%h %%e" > /proc/sys/kernel/core_pattern'
>  ExecStop=/bin/sh -c '/bin/echo "core" > /proc/sys/kernel/core_pattern'

There was a comment that /usr/sbin shouldn't be used on an exact same
patch submitted last month. Please take a look at that suggestion.

https://patchwork.openembedded.org/patch/150063/

Thanks,
Anuj