* RFC: Inclusion of bootloader utilities in task-base @ 2007-12-02 1:47 Rod Whitby 2007-12-02 8:19 ` Koen Kooi 0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread From: Rod Whitby @ 2007-12-02 1:47 UTC (permalink / raw) To: openembedded-devel Some MACHINE configurations have FEATURES defined for 'uboot' and 'redboot'. It looks like these are intended to identify the bootloader used on that machine. These turn on additions to RDEPENDS in task-base for some bootloader utilities. RFC #1: Is putting bootloader utilities in task-base a good idea in the first place? Surely it's something that you either need for first boot (in which case it should be in the more primitive task-boot list), or it's something you use rarely after first boot (in which case it shouldn't be wasting precious flash space in a task-base list but should just be ipkg installed when needed). RFC #2: Shouldn't these be RRECOMMENDS unless they are absolutely critical, so that you can ipkg remove them if you don't want them. RFC #3: I want to add an 'apex' FEATURE for the Apex bootloader, and have that enable the 'apex-env' utility. Any objections? It would be done in the way decided by RFC #2, and subject to an RFC #1 decision. RFC #4: If a machine (like the ixp4xx) can use a number of different bootloaders (redboot and apex in the case of the NSLU2), should they all be listed as features in machine.conf? -- Rod ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: RFC: Inclusion of bootloader utilities in task-base 2007-12-02 1:47 RFC: Inclusion of bootloader utilities in task-base Rod Whitby @ 2007-12-02 8:19 ` Koen Kooi 2007-12-02 10:06 ` Rod Whitby 0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread From: Koen Kooi @ 2007-12-02 8:19 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Using the OpenEmbedded metadata to build Distributions -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Rod Whitby schreef: > Some MACHINE configurations have FEATURES defined for 'uboot' and > 'redboot'. It looks like these are intended to identify the bootloader > used on that machine. > > These turn on additions to RDEPENDS in task-base for some bootloader > utilities. > > RFC #1: Is putting bootloader utilities in task-base a good idea in the > first place? Surely it's something that you either need for first boot > (in which case it should be in the more primitive task-boot list), or > it's something you use rarely after first boot (in which case it > shouldn't be wasting precious flash space in a task-base list but > should just be ipkg installed when needed). > > RFC #2: Shouldn't these be RRECOMMENDS unless they are absolutely > critical, so that you can ipkg remove them if you don't want them. I'm not familiar with the finer points of bootloaders, so I'm not really qualified to respond to this, but if the utils are _critical_, they should be RDEPENDS in task-boot, not task base. regards, Koen > RFC #3: I want to add an 'apex' FEATURE for the Apex bootloader, and > have that enable the 'apex-env' utility. Any objections? It would be > done in the way decided by RFC #2, and subject to an RFC #1 decision. > > RFC #4: If a machine (like the ixp4xx) can use a number of different > bootloaders (redboot and apex in the case of the NSLU2), should they all > be listed as features in machine.conf? > > -- Rod > > _______________________________________________ > Openembedded-devel mailing list > Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org > http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel > - -- koen@dominion.kabel.utwente.nl will go go away in december 2007, please use k.kooi@student.utwente.nl instead. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin) iD8DBQFHUmqDMkyGM64RGpERApTWAJ0Tv04Q+IepkAvT3ciF0TZRMKaPQwCbB1r4 b/wlDDn2RfoPM/di65PDBFM= =H8Wb -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: RFC: Inclusion of bootloader utilities in task-base 2007-12-02 8:19 ` Koen Kooi @ 2007-12-02 10:06 ` Rod Whitby 2007-12-02 19:27 ` Paul Sokolovsky 0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread From: Rod Whitby @ 2007-12-02 10:06 UTC (permalink / raw) To: openembedded-devel Koen Kooi wrote: > Rod Whitby schreef: >> Some MACHINE configurations have FEATURES defined for 'uboot' and >> 'redboot'. It looks like these are intended to identify the bootloader >> used on that machine. > >> These turn on additions to RDEPENDS in task-base for some bootloader >> utilities. > >> RFC #2: Shouldn't these be RRECOMMENDS unless they are absolutely >> critical, so that you can ipkg remove them if you don't want them. > > I'm not familiar with the finer points of bootloaders, so I'm not really > qualified to respond to this, but if the utils are _critical_, they > should be RDEPENDS in task-boot, not task base. Agreed. In the case of redboot and apex, they are not that critical. The redboot util 'fis' is used to reflash fis directory partitions. The apex util 'apex-env' is used to change the kernel cmdline from userspace. Dunno about the uboot util package. -- Rod ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: RFC: Inclusion of bootloader utilities in task-base 2007-12-02 10:06 ` Rod Whitby @ 2007-12-02 19:27 ` Paul Sokolovsky 2007-12-02 21:25 ` Rod Whitby 0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread From: Paul Sokolovsky @ 2007-12-02 19:27 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Rod Whitby; +Cc: openembedded-devel Hello Rod, Sunday, December 2, 2007, 12:06:52 PM, you wrote: > Koen Kooi wrote: >> Rod Whitby schreef: >>> Some MACHINE configurations have FEATURES defined for 'uboot' and >>> 'redboot'. It looks like these are intended to identify the bootloader >>> used on that machine. >> >>> These turn on additions to RDEPENDS in task-base for some bootloader >>> utilities. >> >>> RFC #2: Shouldn't these be RRECOMMENDS unless they are absolutely >>> critical, so that you can ipkg remove them if you don't want them. >> >> I'm not familiar with the finer points of bootloaders, so I'm not really >> qualified to respond to this, but if the utils are _critical_, they >> should be RDEPENDS in task-boot, not task base. > Agreed. In the case of redboot and apex, they are not that critical. > The redboot util 'fis' is used to reflash fis directory partitions. > The apex util 'apex-env' is used to change the kernel cmdline from userspace. This raises the question if user should be allowed (far less required) to change bootloader's standard cmdline as *the normal course of using distro* (== task-base). So, maybe the 1st choice ("Is it good idea at all") is worth more attention. > Dunno about the uboot util package. > -- Rod -- Best regards, Paul mailto:pmiscml@gmail.com ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: RFC: Inclusion of bootloader utilities in task-base 2007-12-02 19:27 ` Paul Sokolovsky @ 2007-12-02 21:25 ` Rod Whitby 2007-12-03 14:19 ` Paul Sokolovsky 0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread From: Rod Whitby @ 2007-12-02 21:25 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Paul Sokolovsky; +Cc: openembedded-devel Paul Sokolovsky wrote: > This raises the question if user should be allowed (far less > required) to change bootloader's standard cmdline as *the normal > course of using distro* (== task-base). So, maybe the 1st choice ("Is > it good idea at all") is worth more attention. Ah, this is a question about which parts of task-base a DISTRO should include or not (by use of it's DISTRO_FEATURES). Not about whether task-base should give distros the choice in the first place. Is Angstrom (the only DISTRO which currently has this feature enabled) meant to be a hand-holding-for-naive-users distro, or a power-users distro? And yes, it's most likely that an end-user distro would put a shell script wrapper around the bootloader utility to safeguard the user for normal end-user operations like changing the rootfs load location, or setting up nfsroot operation. -- Rod ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: RFC: Inclusion of bootloader utilities in task-base 2007-12-02 21:25 ` Rod Whitby @ 2007-12-03 14:19 ` Paul Sokolovsky 2007-12-03 14:33 ` Rod Whitby 0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread From: Paul Sokolovsky @ 2007-12-03 14:19 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Rod Whitby; +Cc: openembedded-devel Hello Rod, Sunday, December 2, 2007, 11:25:12 PM, you wrote: > Paul Sokolovsky wrote: >> This raises the question if user should be allowed (far less >> required) to change bootloader's standard cmdline as *the normal >> course of using distro* (== task-base). So, maybe the 1st choice ("Is >> it good idea at all") is worth more attention. > Ah, this is a question about which parts of task-base a DISTRO should > include or not (by use of it's DISTRO_FEATURES). Not about whether > task-base should give distros the choice in the first place. Ok. > Is Angstrom (the only DISTRO which currently has this feature enabled) > meant to be a hand-holding-for-naive-users distro, or a power-users distro? Apparently, leaning more towards the first, than to the second. On my memory, at least some MTD-related utility was cut from Angstrom for the reasons that users may shoot themselves in foot with it. Other util (ipkg-link) is not incuded for purely idiosyncratic reasons, bit with the same motivation - "users may mess up with it". But well, I'm not arguing if you should include the utils in question or not, but rather on more general question what should go into standard image (or images of different types), and what not. Then, it would be easier to decide on particulars, and assess, if some exception is worth here or there. Motivation is that it's not possible to fit any useful util at all, and space is precious. > And yes, it's most likely that an end-user distro would put a shell script > wrapper around the bootloader utility to safeguard the user for normal > end-user operations like changing the rootfs load location, or setting up > nfsroot operation. > -- Rod -- Best regards, Paul mailto:pmiscml@gmail.com ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: RFC: Inclusion of bootloader utilities in task-base 2007-12-03 14:19 ` Paul Sokolovsky @ 2007-12-03 14:33 ` Rod Whitby 0 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread From: Rod Whitby @ 2007-12-03 14:33 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Paul Sokolovsky; +Cc: openembedded-devel Paul Sokolovsky wrote: > But well, I'm not arguing if you should include the utils in > question or not, but rather on more general question what should go > into standard image (or images of different types), and what not. That's my goal too. A couple of sentences at the top of each image file giving it's intent would go a long way to answering these questions. For example, I'm writing a nas-server-image.bb file right now, and I've put at the top: # This image is intended to provide a configuration # for a network attached storage server device. # # Key features are: # # 1) Must be able to mount attached storage devices like # internal disks, external USB disks, etc. Should support # various filesystem choices, but ext2 at a minimum. # # 2) Must be able to boot from internal flash, or directly # from a filesystem stored on the attached storage. # # 3) Must be able to share that storage across the network # using various protocols like Samba, NFS, etc. # # 4) Bonus points for being able to support other central # network services like a central gateway machine might. # # Although it is tested with the Angstrom distro, it is # intended to be distro-agnostic. -- Rod ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2007-12-03 14:37 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 7+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2007-12-02 1:47 RFC: Inclusion of bootloader utilities in task-base Rod Whitby 2007-12-02 8:19 ` Koen Kooi 2007-12-02 10:06 ` Rod Whitby 2007-12-02 19:27 ` Paul Sokolovsky 2007-12-02 21:25 ` Rod Whitby 2007-12-03 14:19 ` Paul Sokolovsky 2007-12-03 14:33 ` Rod Whitby
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.