From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from proxy.dresearch.de ([87.193.137.100] helo=mail.dresearch.de) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Np0fQ-0002ui-Uf for openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org; Tue, 09 Mar 2010 15:44:21 +0100 Received: from exchange.intern.dresearch.de (unknown [192.168.32.16]) by mail.dresearch.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 888D549127F for ; Tue, 9 Mar 2010 15:41:16 +0100 (CET) Received: from [127.0.0.1] ([10.32.10.2]) by exchange.intern.dresearch.de with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Tue, 9 Mar 2010 15:42:03 +0100 Message-ID: <4B965E0D.8050501@dresearch.de> Date: Tue, 09 Mar 2010 15:41:17 +0100 From: Steffen Sledz User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (Windows/20090812) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org References: <4B8E618C.2080604@dresearch.de> <4B94AA93.4070709@dresearch.de> <1268071514.16526.6.camel@trini-m4400> In-Reply-To: <1268071514.16526.6.camel@trini-m4400> X-OriginalArrivalTime: 09 Mar 2010 14:42:03.0970 (UTC) FILETIME=[AF403220:01CABF96] X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 87.193.137.100 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: sledz@DResearch.DE X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.5 (2008-06-10) on discovery X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.2.5 X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Wed, 25 Jun 2008 17:20:07 +0000) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on linuxtogo.org) Subject: Re: u-boot ready initrds X-BeenThere: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Reply-To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org List-Id: Using the OpenEmbedded metadata to build Distributions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 09 Mar 2010 14:44:24 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Tom Rini wrote: >> Initrds need to be prepared with mkimage to be usable from u-boot. >> The following patch introduces an additional IMAGE_FSTYPE .cpio.gz.u-boot >> for this (at the moment just for hipox machine). >> >> Is this the way it should be done? >> >> Should this better become part of conf/bitbake.conf? > > I don't know why patchwork didn't see this. That's really crazy. None of my patches occurs in the patch queue. I started an extra thread for this [1]. It would be really great if somebody can fix this problem (or tell me what i'm doing wrong). > That said, mkimage -A arm is bad. UBOOT_ARCH is right, Good point. Total agreement. > and comes from kernel-arch.bbclass. So, I > think a full patch would need to add in changes to image.bbclass to > inherit kernel-arch so that UBOOT_ARCH will be evaluated. > > And yes, this I think should be in bitbake.conf with the rest of the > image magics I've too much respect and to little knowledge to make changes inside these core components. Can someone take me by the hand and guide me. ;-) Steffen PS: And another little question: is '.u-boot' a good extension for this? Or is the shorter '.u' better? [1] http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.handhelds.openembedded/30693