781868 - B2G Updates: updater executable is linked against libmozglue.so

Status: RESOLVED FIXED

(Toolkit :: Application Update, defect)

Description

[Marshall Culpepper [:marshall_law]]

During the testing of B2G updates, sometimes the updater process would fail to remount /system as read-only because the linker had mem-mapped b2g.bak/libmozglue.so, marking the filesystem as busy.

Since updater doesn't actually required mozglue, we should remove it from the linking stage. Apparently this has already been fixed for desktop platforms, but Android and Gonk hard-code -lmozglue in WRAP_LDFLAGS, causing the MOZ_GLUE_LDFLAGS make variable to be ignored.

Comment 1

[Marshall Culpepper [:marshall_law]]

Attachment: v1

Comment 2

[(no longer active)]

Comment on attachment 650960 [details] [diff] [review]
v1

Review of attachment 650960 [details] [diff] [review]:
-----------------------------------------------------------------

This needs review from a build system peer.

Comment 3

[Kyle Huey (Exited; not receiving bugmail, old account, do not use)]

Comment on attachment 650960 [details] [diff] [review]
v1

Review of attachment 650960 [details] [diff] [review]:
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Do we need this for Android too?

Comment 4

[Marshall Culpepper [:marshall_law]]

(In reply to Kyle Huey [:khuey] ([e-mail]) from comment #3)
> Do we need this for Android too?

I just chatted w/ mbrubeck and snorp, and it sounds like Android isn't using the standalone updater process. They have a custom APK based updater for nightly / aurora updates, and Google play for beta / release updates.

Comment 5

[(no longer active)]

(In reply to comment #4)
> (In reply to Kyle Huey [:khuey] ([e-mail]) from comment #3)
> > Do we need this for Android too?
> 
> I just chatted w/ mbrubeck and snorp, and it sounds like Android isn't using
> the standalone updater process. They have a custom APK based updater for
> nightly / aurora updates, and Google play for beta / release updates.

True, but I think we still want to fix this for Android as well, just as a matter of cleanliness, in the off chance that someone uses updater on Android for something in a far future.  :-)

Comment 6

[Marshall Culpepper [:marshall_law]]

(In reply to Ehsan Akhgari [:ehsan] from comment #5)
> True, but I think we still want to fix this for Android as well, just as a
> matter of cleanliness, in the off chance that someone uses updater on
> Android for something in a far future.  :-)

My main objection to this is that the standalone updater is not even built right now in Android. If they do need it in the future, couldn't we just create a follow up bug? See the Makefile.in in toolkit/mozapps/update [1].

https://mxr.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/source/toolkit/mozapps/update/Makefile.in#21

Comment 7

[(no longer active)]

(In reply to Marshall Culpepper [:marshall_law] from comment #6)
> (In reply to Ehsan Akhgari [:ehsan] from comment #5)
> > True, but I think we still want to fix this for Android as well, just as a
> > matter of cleanliness, in the off chance that someone uses updater on
> > Android for something in a far future.  :-)
> 
> My main objection to this is that the standalone updater is not even built
> right now in Android. If they do need it in the future, couldn't we just
> create a follow up bug? See the Makefile.in in toolkit/mozapps/update [1].
> 
> https://mxr.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/source/toolkit/mozapps/update/
> Makefile.in#21

Yep, I know.  Which is why I talked about cleanliness not correctness.  :-)

Comment 8

[Marshall Culpepper [:marshall_law]]

https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/mozilla-inbound/rev/34c6bb1b619f

Comment 9

[Ryan VanderMeulen [:RyanVM]]

https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/34c6bb1b619f