From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by yocto-www.yoctoproject.org (Postfix, from userid 118) id E1871E00750; Mon, 9 Mar 2015 12:56:52 -0700 (PDT) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on yocto-www.yoctoproject.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, FREEMAIL_FROM, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-HAM-Report: * -0.7 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, low * trust * [193.201.172.118 listed in list.dnswl.org] * 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider * (picmaster[at]mail.bg) * -1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% * [score: 0.0000] * -0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's * domain * 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily * valid * -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature Received: from mx2.mail.bg (mx2.mail.bg [193.201.172.118]) by yocto-www.yoctoproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A6EEE003FA for ; Mon, 9 Mar 2015 12:56:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.0.40] (unknown [93.152.143.60]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx2.mail.bg (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B389B60004BA; Mon, 9 Mar 2015 21:56:46 +0200 (EET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=mail.bg; s=default; t=1425931006; bh=bvmbKAQOmLh/Tmi98CE7UmS4CrjpRdK13u6RD8Jc0Ik=; h=Message-ID:Date:From:MIME-Version:To:CC:Subject:References: In-Reply-To:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=ltfUVNg/1WabyS7Tk40cgw8Vss90KIgyqw+4aj99A7Iy3MeajyIzZtV5QAH8KwrUP /El3/LvW/PalgiuGB7xe0ArbBFB+OFyMHoSQ/NkPrnyZpzqa9UWCjrpuDSJkjpzDeo bc+Nf8m+s651oW09jCIz+OzojXOEwZU1Idj5DbCU= Message-ID: <54FDFAFE.7020707@mail.bg> Date: Mon, 09 Mar 2015 21:56:46 +0200 From: Nikolay Dimitrov User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Icedove/31.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Khem Raj References: <54FDF2EE.6070509@mail.bg> In-Reply-To: Cc: yocto@yoctoproject.org Subject: Re: 2 images with single Bitbake recipe X-BeenThere: yocto@yoctoproject.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of all things Yocto Project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 09 Mar 2015 19:56:53 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Khem, On 03/09/2015 09:31 PM, Khem Raj wrote: > >> On Mar 9, 2015, at 12:22 PM, Nikolay Dimitrov wrote: >> >> Hi guys, >> >> I need an advice for the following Yocto use case. >> >> My system has to boot via minimal initramfs and then must use the full >> rootfs. I can use 2 separate recipes to generate the 2 images (minimal >> initramfs, complete rootfs), but I prefer to create all my build- >> products via single bitbake command. >> >> So, is it possible to build these 2 images with 1 recipe, and if "yes" >> then how? >> > > > Look at how initramfs http://www.yoctoproject.org/docs/current/ref-manual/ref-manual.html#ref-tasks-bundle_initramfs > and also meta/conf/local.conf.sample.extended Thanks for answering. INITRAMFS_IMAGE_BUNDLE doesn't achieve what I need, instead it merges the kernel image and initramfs in a single file. What I need is, instead of invoking: bitbake myproduct-image bitbake myproduct-initrams-image to invoke: bitbake myproduct-combined-image ...which should create 2 separate images. Regards, Nikolay