How do you remove an IMAGEFS?

How do you remove an IMAGEFS?

[Paul D. DeRocco]

x86-base.inc adds "live" to IMAGE_FSTYPES. I have no need for a live
image, or an iso, so I thought adding IMAGE_FSTYPES_remove = "live iso" to
my image recipe might work, but it complained in do_bootimg that my recipe
"depends upon non-existent task do_image_ext4". On a hunch, I movved the
IMAGE_FSTYPES_remove to before inheriting core-image, and then it didn't
complain, but it didn't build ANY images.

So what's the right way to suppress live image and iso image generation,
where those things are included in some stock config file somewhere?

-- 

Ciao,               Paul D. DeRocco
Paul                mailto:pderocco@ix.netcom.com

Re: How do you remove an IMAGEFS?

[Patrick Ohly]

On Fri, 2017-06-23 at 16:21 -0700, Paul D. DeRocco wrote:
> x86-base.inc adds "live" to IMAGE_FSTYPES. I have no need for a live
> image, or an iso, so I thought adding IMAGE_FSTYPES_remove = "live iso" to
> my image recipe might work, but it complained in do_bootimg that my recipe
> "depends upon non-existent task do_image_ext4". On a hunch, I movved the
> IMAGE_FSTYPES_remove to before inheriting core-image,

That's the only feasible approach at the moment. IMAGE_FSTYPES gets
checked while inheriting the class and then triggers inheriting
image-live.bbclass even when the "live" type gets removed later one.

There's a patch for x86-base.inc which removes this unconditional
extension of IMAGE_FSTYPES, see "[OE-core] [PATCH] x86-base.inc: Don't
add live to IMAGE_FSTYPES, default instead".

>  and then it didn't
> complain, but it didn't build ANY images.

You still need to set some kind of IMAGE_FSTYPES, for example "wic".

Further hacks may be needed depending on your version of OE-core, for
example inheriting the class set by EFI_PROVIDER.

Here's how we solved this in refkit:
https://github.com/intel/intel-iot-refkit/blob/0ec24f348453/meta-refkit-core/classes/refkit-image.bbclass#L219

-- 
Best Regards, Patrick Ohly

The content of this message is my personal opinion only and although
I am an employee of Intel, the statements I make here in no way
represent Intel's position on the issue, nor am I authorized to speak
on behalf of Intel on this matter.

Re: How do you remove an IMAGEFS?

[Paul D. DeRocco]

> From: Patrick Ohly [mailto:patrick.ohly@intel.com] 
> 
> On Fri, 2017-06-23 at 16:21 -0700, Paul D. DeRocco wrote:
> > x86-base.inc adds "live" to IMAGE_FSTYPES. I have no need for a live
> > image, or an iso, so I thought adding IMAGE_FSTYPES_remove 
> > = "live iso" to
> > my image recipe might work, but it complained in do_bootimg 
> > that my recipe
> > "depends upon non-existent task do_image_ext4". On a hunch, 
> > I movved the
> > IMAGE_FSTYPES_remove to before inheriting core-image,
> 
> That's the only feasible approach at the moment. IMAGE_FSTYPES gets
> checked while inheriting the class and then triggers inheriting
> image-live.bbclass even when the "live" type gets removed later one.
> 
> There's a patch for x86-base.inc which removes this unconditional
> extension of IMAGE_FSTYPES, see "[OE-core] [PATCH] x86-base.inc: Don't
> add live to IMAGE_FSTYPES, default instead".
> 
> >  and then it didn't
> > complain, but it didn't build ANY images.
> 
> You still need to set some kind of IMAGE_FSTYPES, for example "wic".

Yes, that's what I ended up doing, so it's nice to know I'm on the right track.

However, when I explicitly added "hddimg", I found that Syslinux was still configured for live image, with "boot" and "install" menu options. I found some code in image.bbclass that looks like it forces "image-live" if either "iso" or "hddimg" is included. I can of course hide that by setting various Syslinux options, but how do I get a plain hddimg that just boots up and runs, without any support for an "install" option in the kernel? Is that normally done with "wic" and a minimal .wks script?

-- 

Ciao,               Paul D. DeRocco
Paul                mailto:pderocco@ix.netcom.com

Re: How do you remove an IMAGEFS?

[Patrick Ohly]

On Tue, 2017-06-27 at 12:08 -0700, Paul D. DeRocco wrote:
> However, when I explicitly added "hddimg", I found that Syslinux was
> still configured for live image, with "boot" and "install" menu
> options. I found some code in image.bbclass that looks like it forces
> "image-live" if either "iso" or "hddimg" is included. I can of course
> hide that by setting various Syslinux options, but how do I get a
> plain hddimg that just boots up and runs, without any support for an
> "install" option in the kernel? Is that normally done with "wic" and a
> minimal .wks script?

I don't know that much about how boot loader menus get generated (we
don't use a boot loader in refkit). But yes, wic is the mechanism of
choice for creating images these days.

-- 
Best Regards, Patrick Ohly

The content of this message is my personal opinion only and although
I am an employee of Intel, the statements I make here in no way
represent Intel's position on the issue, nor am I authorized to speak
on behalf of Intel on this matter.