Problems building live image

Problems building live image

[Gary Thomas]

I'd like to to some testing that qemu just doesn't seem up to
so I attempted to build a live ISO per the documentation. I
added these lines to local.conf:
   IMAGE_FSTYPES_genericx86 += "live"
   NOISO_genericx86 = "0"

When I try to build core-image-base I get this error:
   ERROR: INITRD_IMAGE_LIVE core-image-minimal-initramfs cannot use image live, hddimg or iso.
   ERROR: Check IMAGE_FSTYPES and INITRAMFS_FSTYPES settings.
   ERROR: Failed to parse recipe: /local/poky-cutting-edge/meta/recipes-core/images/core-image-minimal-initramfs.bb

I'm using a recent Poky checkout (d53413d3a8444c38a83ea37867c8af7754d8e702)

Am I just doing something wrong here? I was following this section of the mega-manual:

   26.56. image-live.bbclass¶

   The image-live class supports building "live" images.

   Normally, you do not use this class directly. Instead, you add "live" to IMAGE_FSTYPES.
   For example, if you were building an ISO image, you would add "live" to IMAGE_FSTYPES,
   set the NOISO variable to "0" and the build system would use the image-live class to
   build the ISO image.

I don't have any available hardware for this testing, so I thought
I'd use VirtualBox.  Is this a reasonable approach?  I want to use
a live ISO so I get a writable file system.  I tried just using the
.hddimage but that doesn't boot with VirtualBox :-(

To be clear, along with the additions above in local.conf, I tried:
   $ MACHINE=genericx86 bitbake core-image-base

Thanks for any ideas

-- 
------------------------------------------------------------
Gary Thomas                 |  Consulting for the
MLB Associates              |    Embedded world
------------------------------------------------------------

Re: Problems building live image

[Khem Raj]

just use IMAGE_FSTYPES = "vmdk" if you plan to use virtualbox and need
a raw image.

On Sun, Mar 13, 2016 at 10:16 PM, Gary Thomas <gary@mlbassoc.com> wrote:
> I'd like to to some testing that qemu just doesn't seem up to
> so I attempted to build a live ISO per the documentation. I
> added these lines to local.conf:
>   IMAGE_FSTYPES_genericx86 += "live"
>   NOISO_genericx86 = "0"
>
> When I try to build core-image-base I get this error:
>   ERROR: INITRD_IMAGE_LIVE core-image-minimal-initramfs cannot use image
> live, hddimg or iso.
>   ERROR: Check IMAGE_FSTYPES and INITRAMFS_FSTYPES settings.
>   ERROR: Failed to parse recipe:
> /local/poky-cutting-edge/meta/recipes-core/images/core-image-minimal-initramfs.bb
>
> I'm using a recent Poky checkout (d53413d3a8444c38a83ea37867c8af7754d8e702)
>
> Am I just doing something wrong here? I was following this section of the
> mega-manual:
>
>   26.56. image-live.bbclass¶
>
>   The image-live class supports building "live" images.
>
>   Normally, you do not use this class directly. Instead, you add "live" to
> IMAGE_FSTYPES.
>   For example, if you were building an ISO image, you would add "live" to
> IMAGE_FSTYPES,
>   set the NOISO variable to "0" and the build system would use the
> image-live class to
>   build the ISO image.
>
> I don't have any available hardware for this testing, so I thought
> I'd use VirtualBox.  Is this a reasonable approach?  I want to use
> a live ISO so I get a writable file system.  I tried just using the
> .hddimage but that doesn't boot with VirtualBox :-(
>
> To be clear, along with the additions above in local.conf, I tried:
>   $ MACHINE=genericx86 bitbake core-image-base
>
> Thanks for any ideas
>
> --
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> Gary Thomas                 |  Consulting for the
> MLB Associates              |    Embedded world
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> --
> _______________________________________________
> yocto mailing list
> yocto@yoctoproject.org
> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto

Re: Problems building live image

[K Richard Pixley]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2883 bytes --]

If I add that line, (

IMAGE_FSTYPES = "vmdk"

), to my local.conf, I get:

    rich@burgess> time bitbake core-image-minimal
    ERROR:  OE-core's config sanity checker detected a potential
    misconfiguration.
         Either fix the cause of this error or at your own risk disable
    the checker (see sanity.conf).
         Following is the list of potential problems / advisories:

         Error, IMAGE_FSTYPES vmdk and live can't be built together


    Summary: There was 1 ERROR message shown, returning a non-zero exit
    code.

Building yocto-2.0 for genericx86-64.  What am I doing wrong?

--rich

On 3/13/16 23:09 , Khem Raj wrote:
> just use IMAGE_FSTYPES = "vmdk" if you plan to use virtualbox and need
> a raw image.
>
> On Sun, Mar 13, 2016 at 10:16 PM, Gary Thomas <gary@mlbassoc.com> wrote:
>> I'd like to to some testing that qemu just doesn't seem up to
>> so I attempted to build a live ISO per the documentation. I
>> added these lines to local.conf:
>>    IMAGE_FSTYPES_genericx86 += "live"
>>    NOISO_genericx86 = "0"
>>
>> When I try to build core-image-base I get this error:
>>    ERROR: INITRD_IMAGE_LIVE core-image-minimal-initramfs cannot use image
>> live, hddimg or iso.
>>    ERROR: Check IMAGE_FSTYPES and INITRAMFS_FSTYPES settings.
>>    ERROR: Failed to parse recipe:
>> /local/poky-cutting-edge/meta/recipes-core/images/core-image-minimal-initramfs.bb
>>
>> I'm using a recent Poky checkout (d53413d3a8444c38a83ea37867c8af7754d8e702)
>>
>> Am I just doing something wrong here? I was following this section of the
>> mega-manual:
>>
>>    26.56. image-live.bbclass¶
>>
>>    The image-live class supports building "live" images.
>>
>>    Normally, you do not use this class directly. Instead, you add "live" to
>> IMAGE_FSTYPES.
>>    For example, if you were building an ISO image, you would add "live" to
>> IMAGE_FSTYPES,
>>    set the NOISO variable to "0" and the build system would use the
>> image-live class to
>>    build the ISO image.
>>
>> I don't have any available hardware for this testing, so I thought
>> I'd use VirtualBox.  Is this a reasonable approach?  I want to use
>> a live ISO so I get a writable file system.  I tried just using the
>> .hddimage but that doesn't boot with VirtualBox :-(
>>
>> To be clear, along with the additions above in local.conf, I tried:
>>    $ MACHINE=genericx86 bitbake core-image-base
>>
>> Thanks for any ideas
>>
>> --
>> ------------------------------------------------------------
>> Gary Thomas                 |  Consulting for the
>> MLB Associates              |    Embedded world
>> ------------------------------------------------------------
>> --
>> _______________________________________________
>> yocto mailing list
>> yocto@yoctoproject.org
>> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3655 bytes --]

Re: Problems building live image

[Rudolf Streif]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1819 bytes --]

Richard,

On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 1:55 PM, K Richard Pixley <rich@noir.com> wrote:

> If I add that line, (
>
> IMAGE_FSTYPES = "vmdk"
>
> ), to my local.conf, I get:
>
> rich@burgess> time bitbake core-image-minimal
> ERROR:  OE-core's config sanity checker detected a potential
> misconfiguration.
>     Either fix the cause of this error or at your own risk disable the
> checker (see sanity.conf).
>     Following is the list of potential problems / advisories:
>
>     Error, IMAGE_FSTYPES vmdk and live can't be built together
>
>
> Summary: There was 1 ERROR message shown, returning a non-zero exit code.
>
> Building yocto-2.0 for genericx86-64.  What am I doing wrong?
>
> Nothing really. The issue is conflicting SYSLINUX_LABELS for the boot
options. For the live image the labels are boot and install while there is
only boot for the vmdk image. Prior to 2.0 Jethro you could specify both,
live and vmdk, in IMAGE_FSTYPES. It built both but the live image was
missing the install boot option (it had two boot options instead). This
function in syslinux.bbclass now flags the issue:

# Some of the vars for vm and live image are conflicted, this function
# is used for fixing the problem.
def syslinux_set_vars(d, suffix):
   vars = ['SYSLINUX_ROOT', 'SYSLINUX_CFG', 'LABELS', 'INITRD']
   for var in vars:
       var_with_suffix = var + '_' + suffix
       if d.getVar(var, True):
           bb.warn('Found potential conflicted var %s, please use %s rather
than %s' % \
               (var, var_with_suffix, var))
       elif d.getVar(var_with_suffix, True):
           d.setVar(var, d.getVar(var_with_suffix, True))


 Technically, in my opinion, you should be able to build both at the same
time. You may want to disable the sanity checker.

Cheers,
Rudi

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3513 bytes --]

Re: Problems building live image

[K Richard Pixley]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2241 bytes --]

On 3/14/16 15:58 , Rudolf Streif wrote:
> Richard,
>
> On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 1:55 PM, K Richard Pixley <rich@noir.com 
> <mailto:rich@noir.com>> wrote:
>
>     If I add that line, (
>
>     IMAGE_FSTYPES = "vmdk"
>
>     ), to my local.conf, I get:
>
>         rich@burgess> time bitbake core-image-minimal
>         ERROR:  OE-core's config sanity checker detected a potential
>         misconfiguration.
>             Either fix the cause of this error or at your own risk
>         disable the checker (see sanity.conf).
>             Following is the list of potential problems / advisories:
>
>             Error, IMAGE_FSTYPES vmdk and live can't be built together
>
>
>         Summary: There was 1 ERROR message shown, returning a non-zero
>         exit code.
>
>     Building yocto-2.0 for genericx86-64.  What am I doing wrong?
>
> Nothing really. The issue is conflicting SYSLINUX_LABELS for the boot 
> options. For the live image the labels are boot and install while 
> there is only boot for the vmdk image. Prior to 2.0 Jethro you could 
> specify both, live and vmdk, in IMAGE_FSTYPES. It built both but the 
> live image was missing the install boot option (it had two boot 
> options instead). This function in syslinux.bbclass now flags the issue:
>
> # Some of the vars for vm and live image are conflicted, this function
> # is used for fixing the problem.
> def syslinux_set_vars(d, suffix):
>    vars = ['SYSLINUX_ROOT', 'SYSLINUX_CFG', 'LABELS', 'INITRD']
>    for var in vars:
>        var_with_suffix = var + '_'+ suffix
>        if d.getVar(var, True):
>            bb.warn('Found potential conflicted var %s, please use %s 
> rather than %s'% \
>                (var, var_with_suffix, var))
>        elif d.getVar(var_with_suffix, True):
>            d.setVar(var, d.getVar(var_with_suffix, True))
>
>
>  Technically, in my opinion, you should be able to build both at the 
> same time. You may want to disable the sanity checker.
Thank you.

What stops us from building different boot labels for different images?  
That seems like the obvious choice.  Or perhaps, using "boot" for all 
syslinux images and adding "install" for "live" images.

--rich

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 5304 bytes --]

Re: Problems building live image

[Rudolf J Streif]

On Monday, March 14, 2016 04:38:35 PM K Richard Pixley wrote:
> 
> What stops us from building different boot labels for different images?  
> That seems like the obvious choice.  Or perhaps, using "boot" for all 
> syslinux images and adding "install" for "live" images.

Fair question. Nothing really, I would think. The classes need to be adjusted to deal with different LABELS.
 :rjs

Re: Problems building live image

[K Richard Pixley]

On 3/13/16 22:16 , Gary Thomas wrote:
> I'd like to to some testing that qemu just doesn't seem up to
> so I attempted to build a live ISO per the documentation. I
> added these lines to local.conf:
>   IMAGE_FSTYPES_genericx86 += "live"
>   NOISO_genericx86 = "0"
>
> When I try to build core-image-base I get this error:
>   ERROR: INITRD_IMAGE_LIVE core-image-minimal-initramfs cannot use 
> image live, hddimg or iso.
>   ERROR: Check IMAGE_FSTYPES and INITRAMFS_FSTYPES settings.
>   ERROR: Failed to parse recipe: 
> /local/poky-cutting-edge/meta/recipes-core/images/core-image-minimal-initramfs.bb
>
> I'm using a recent Poky checkout 
> (d53413d3a8444c38a83ea37867c8af7754d8e702)
>
> Am I just doing something wrong here? I was following this section of 
> the mega-manual:
>
>   26.56. image-live.bbclass¶
>
>   The image-live class supports building "live" images.
>
>   Normally, you do not use this class directly. Instead, you add 
> "live" to IMAGE_FSTYPES.
>   For example, if you were building an ISO image, you would add "live" 
> to IMAGE_FSTYPES,
>   set the NOISO variable to "0" and the build system would use the 
> image-live class to
>   build the ISO image.
>
> I don't have any available hardware for this testing, so I thought
> I'd use VirtualBox.  Is this a reasonable approach?  I want to use
> a live ISO so I get a writable file system.  I tried just using the
> .hddimage but that doesn't boot with VirtualBox :-(
>
> To be clear, along with the additions above in local.conf, I tried:
>   $ MACHINE=genericx86 bitbake core-image-base
>
> Thanks for any ideas
You can boot the .hddimg on VirtualBox by first converting it to vdi, 
(or vmdk), using:

qemu-img convert -O vdi foo.hddimg foo.vdi

The vmdk doesn't seem to work for me on VMware, oddly.  And adding vmdk 
to IMAGE_FSTYPES doesn't seem to work either as it is apparently built 
from hdddirect, (no clue why that's distinct from hddimg but it doesn't 
boot for me).

--rich

Re: Problems building live image

[Gary Thomas]

On 03/14/2016 05:34 PM, K Richard Pixley wrote:
> On 3/13/16 22:16 , Gary Thomas wrote:
>> I'd like to to some testing that qemu just doesn't seem up to
>> so I attempted to build a live ISO per the documentation. I
>> added these lines to local.conf:
>>   IMAGE_FSTYPES_genericx86 += "live"
>>   NOISO_genericx86 = "0"
>>
>> When I try to build core-image-base I get this error:
>>   ERROR: INITRD_IMAGE_LIVE core-image-minimal-initramfs cannot use image live, hddimg or iso.
>>   ERROR: Check IMAGE_FSTYPES and INITRAMFS_FSTYPES settings.
>>   ERROR: Failed to parse recipe: /local/poky-cutting-edge/meta/recipes-core/images/core-image-minimal-initramfs.bb
>>
>> I'm using a recent Poky checkout (d53413d3a8444c38a83ea37867c8af7754d8e702)
>>
>> Am I just doing something wrong here? I was following this section of the mega-manual:
>>
>>   26.56. image-live.bbclass¶
>>
>>   The image-live class supports building "live" images.
>>
>>   Normally, you do not use this class directly. Instead, you add "live" to IMAGE_FSTYPES.
>>   For example, if you were building an ISO image, you would add "live" to IMAGE_FSTYPES,
>>   set the NOISO variable to "0" and the build system would use the image-live class to
>>   build the ISO image.
>>
>> I don't have any available hardware for this testing, so I thought
>> I'd use VirtualBox.  Is this a reasonable approach?  I want to use
>> a live ISO so I get a writable file system.  I tried just using the
>> .hddimage but that doesn't boot with VirtualBox :-(
>>
>> To be clear, along with the additions above in local.conf, I tried:
>>   $ MACHINE=genericx86 bitbake core-image-base
>>
>> Thanks for any ideas
> You can boot the .hddimg on VirtualBox by first converting it to vdi, (or vmdk), using:
>
> qemu-img convert -O vdi foo.hddimg foo.vdi
>
> The vmdk doesn't seem to work for me on VMware, oddly.  And adding vmdk to IMAGE_FSTYPES doesn't seem to work either as
> it is apparently built from hdddirect, (no clue why that's distinct from hddimg but it doesn't boot for me).

Thanks.  I got the .vmdk to boot but I had to manually select
the root device during boot to root=/dev/hda2.  After that, it
worked as expected.

-- 
------------------------------------------------------------
Gary Thomas                 |  Consulting for the
MLB Associates              |    Embedded world
------------------------------------------------------------

Re: Problems building live image

[Khem Raj]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2854 bytes --]


> On Mar 14, 2016, at 10:01 AM, Gary Thomas <gary@mlbassoc.com> wrote:
> 
> On 03/14/2016 05:34 PM, K Richard Pixley wrote:
>> On 3/13/16 22:16 , Gary Thomas wrote:
>>> I'd like to to some testing that qemu just doesn't seem up to
>>> so I attempted to build a live ISO per the documentation. I
>>> added these lines to local.conf:
>>>  IMAGE_FSTYPES_genericx86 += "live"
>>>  NOISO_genericx86 = "0"
>>> 
>>> When I try to build core-image-base I get this error:
>>>  ERROR: INITRD_IMAGE_LIVE core-image-minimal-initramfs cannot use image live, hddimg or iso.
>>>  ERROR: Check IMAGE_FSTYPES and INITRAMFS_FSTYPES settings.
>>>  ERROR: Failed to parse recipe: /local/poky-cutting-edge/meta/recipes-core/images/core-image-minimal-initramfs.bb
>>> 
>>> I'm using a recent Poky checkout (d53413d3a8444c38a83ea37867c8af7754d8e702)
>>> 
>>> Am I just doing something wrong here? I was following this section of the mega-manual:
>>> 
>>>  26.56. image-live.bbclass¶
>>> 
>>>  The image-live class supports building "live" images.
>>> 
>>>  Normally, you do not use this class directly. Instead, you add "live" to IMAGE_FSTYPES.
>>>  For example, if you were building an ISO image, you would add "live" to IMAGE_FSTYPES,
>>>  set the NOISO variable to "0" and the build system would use the image-live class to
>>>  build the ISO image.
>>> 
>>> I don't have any available hardware for this testing, so I thought
>>> I'd use VirtualBox.  Is this a reasonable approach?  I want to use
>>> a live ISO so I get a writable file system.  I tried just using the
>>> .hddimage but that doesn't boot with VirtualBox :-(
>>> 
>>> To be clear, along with the additions above in local.conf, I tried:
>>>  $ MACHINE=genericx86 bitbake core-image-base
>>> 
>>> Thanks for any ideas
>> You can boot the .hddimg on VirtualBox by first converting it to vdi, (or vmdk), using:
>> 
>> qemu-img convert -O vdi foo.hddimg foo.vdi
>> 
>> The vmdk doesn't seem to work for me on VMware, oddly.  And adding vmdk to IMAGE_FSTYPES doesn't seem to work either as
>> it is apparently built from hdddirect, (no clue why that's distinct from hddimg but it doesn't boot for me).
> 
> Thanks.  I got the .vmdk to boot but I had to manually select
> the root device during boot to root=/dev/hda2.  After that, it
> worked as expected.
> 


you can also set
SYSLINUX_ROOT = "root=/dev/hda2”
in some place in your configuration metadata



> --
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> Gary Thomas                 |  Consulting for the
> MLB Associates              |    Embedded world
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> --
> _______________________________________________
> yocto mailing list
> yocto@yoctoproject.org
> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto


[-- Attachment #2: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 211 bytes --]

Re: Problems building live image

[K Richard Pixley]

While we're on it...

Can anyone explain what a "live" image is intended to be?

(I haven't gotten a live image to "work", but I'm not entirely sure I 
know what "work" means for a live image.)

Or how hdddirect is intended to be different from hddimg?

--rich

Re: Problems building live image

[Khem Raj]

On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 10:11 AM, K Richard Pixley <rich@noir.com> wrote:
> While we're on it...
>
> Can anyone explain what a "live" image is intended to be?

it can either boot from the disk or you can run the installer to
install it to another media on your device.

>
> (I haven't gotten a live image to "work", but I'm not entirely sure I know
> what "work" means for a live image.)

what issues do you see ? may that can help answer this

>
> Or how hdddirect is intended to be different from hddimg?

hdddirect is raw disk image.

Re: Problems building live image

[K Richard Pixley]

On 3/14/16 10:16 , Khem Raj wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 10:11 AM, K Richard Pixley <rich@noir.com> wrote:
>> While we're on it...
>>
>> Can anyone explain what a "live" image is intended to be?
> it can either boot from the disk or you can run the installer to
> install it to another media on your device.
How is that different from an ISO?  I mean, isn't that what an ISO image 
does?
>> (I haven't gotten a live image to "work", but I'm not entirely sure I know
>> what "work" means for a live image.)
> what issues do you see ? may that can help answer this
Mostly build time issues with "live" conflicting with "vmdk" and the like.
>> Or how hdddirect is intended to be different from hddimg?
> hdddirect is raw disk image.
I thought hddimg was a raw disk image.  If hdddirect is a raw disk 
image, then what's hddimg?

--rich

Re: Problems building live image

[Radzykewycz, T (Radzy)]

________________________________________
> While we're on it...
> 
> Can anyone explain what a "live" image is intended to be?
> 
> (I haven't gotten a live image to "work", but I'm not entirely
> sure I know what "work" means for a live image.)
> 
> Or how hdddirect is intended to be different from hddimg?
> 
> --rich

Can't say as how I'm anything close to an expert on it, but....

My impression was that a live image was one that

- Booted from removable media

- Did not mount a local hard disk as rootfs, but instead copied
  the rootfs from the boot media

- Optionally, might include an installer to install the image
  onto a local hard disk.

Enjoy!

				-- radzy