From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp.webfaction.com (mail6.webfaction.com [74.55.86.74]) by yocto-www.yoctoproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 249A4E004D1 for ; Sat, 5 Jan 2013 06:25:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.11] (c-68-46-169-75.hsd1.nj.comcast.net [68.46.169.75]) by smtp.webfaction.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 615BF66EC4AE; Sat, 5 Jan 2013 08:25:32 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: <50E837DA.8010101@mindchasers.com> Date: Sat, 05 Jan 2013 09:25:30 -0500 From: Bob Cochran User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/17.0 Thunderbird/17.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: McClintock Matthew-B29882 References: <50DDB18B.5000704@mindchasers.com> <70CC66F5C30A414DADDA6973E4CA391A81695A@039-SN1MPN1-002.039d.mgd.msft.net> In-Reply-To: <70CC66F5C30A414DADDA6973E4CA391A81695A@039-SN1MPN1-002.039d.mgd.msft.net> Cc: "meta-freescale@yoctoproject.org" Subject: Re: [qoriq] shouldn't fsl-image-minimal.bb inherit image-types-uboot? X-BeenThere: meta-freescale@yoctoproject.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: Usage and development list for the meta-fsl-* layers List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 05 Jan 2013 14:25:33 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 01/02/2013 02:40 PM, McClintock Matthew-B29882 wrote: > On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 8:49 AM, Bob Cochran wrote: >> Hi, >> >> Working from the master branches of both poky and meta-fsl-ppc, I just built >> a fresh image of fsl-image-minimal and noticed that >> fsl-image-minimal-.ext2.gz.u-boot links to a non existent file. >> >> Since ext2.gz.u-boot is one of the IMAGE_FSTYPES, I believe the intent is to >> build a rootfs that is bootable by u-boot. However, I believe >> image_types_uboot needs to be inherited in the recipe. >> >> Therefore, I modified the recipe to have: >> >> inherit core-image image_types_uboot >> >> Can someone from Freescale please comment on this? Do you want the minimal >> image recipe to build a u-boot bootable rootfs? If so, I think we want to >> patch the recipe. > > We currently do this in our setup script, it could probably (and > probably should be) be added somewhere in the layer. Can you send a > tested patch? > > -M > I will, but I'll do it after I resolve a problem in the master branches that's preventing my p1010rdb from booting. It hangs during (sysv)init, and I believe it has something to do with /dev/console. It's hanging up in one of the init scripts, but the frustrating thing is that neither echo nor set -x are being directed to the console. Still poking around trying to figure it out.....