From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com [148.163.158.5]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3vBdld3Q9kzDqB6 for ; Mon, 30 Jan 2017 16:50:21 +1100 (AEDT) Received: from pps.filterd (m0098419.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.20/8.16.0.20) with SMTP id v0U5mZRF131142 for ; Mon, 30 Jan 2017 00:50:17 -0500 Received: from e31.co.us.ibm.com (e31.co.us.ibm.com [32.97.110.149]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 289y2srw6v-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Mon, 30 Jan 2017 00:50:17 -0500 Received: from localhost by e31.co.us.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Sun, 29 Jan 2017 22:50:16 -0700 Received: from d03dlp03.boulder.ibm.com (9.17.202.179) by e31.co.us.ibm.com (192.168.1.131) with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted; Sun, 29 Jan 2017 22:50:13 -0700 Received: from b03cxnp08028.gho.boulder.ibm.com (b03cxnp08028.gho.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.130.20]) by d03dlp03.boulder.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 97FD419D801C; Sun, 29 Jan 2017 22:49:27 -0700 (MST) Received: from b03ledav002.gho.boulder.ibm.com (b03ledav002.gho.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.130.233]) by b03cxnp08028.gho.boulder.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id v0U5nuUZ10224026; Sun, 29 Jan 2017 22:50:12 -0700 Received: from b03ledav002.gho.boulder.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id B4853136043; Sun, 29 Jan 2017 22:50:12 -0700 (MST) Received: from birb.localdomain (unknown [9.185.16.210]) by b03ledav002.gho.boulder.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46A4713603C; Sun, 29 Jan 2017 22:50:12 -0700 (MST) Received: by birb.localdomain (Postfix, from userid 1000) id C4502229DB26; Mon, 30 Jan 2017 16:50:10 +1100 (AEDT) From: Stewart Smith To: Adriana Kobylak , "Anton D. Kachalov" Cc: "openbmc\@lists.ozlabs.org" Subject: Re: OpenBMC Image Management In-Reply-To: <1EDA4FEC-68CD-4215-AB90-3F087EEF3CA6@linux.vnet.ibm.com> References: <75C63AB7-E340-4A78-BA82-80F96EAEA051@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <101001485427397@webcorp03h.yandex-team.ru> <1EDA4FEC-68CD-4215-AB90-3F087EEF3CA6@linux.vnet.ibm.com> User-Agent: Notmuch/0.21+24~gbceb651 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/25.1.1 (x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2017 16:50:10 +1100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Content-Scanned: Fidelis XPS MAILER x-cbid: 17013005-8235-0000-0000-00000AD333EB X-IBM-SpamModules-Scores: X-IBM-SpamModules-Versions: BY=3.00006523; HX=3.00000240; KW=3.00000007; PH=3.00000004; SC=3.00000201; SDB=6.00814588; UDB=6.00397586; IPR=6.00592029; BA=6.00005097; NDR=6.00000001; ZLA=6.00000005; ZF=6.00000009; ZB=6.00000000; ZP=6.00000000; ZH=6.00000000; ZU=6.00000002; MB=3.00014100; XFM=3.00000011; UTC=2017-01-30 05:50:14 X-IBM-AV-DETECTION: SAVI=unused REMOTE=unused XFE=unused x-cbparentid: 17013005-8236-0000-0000-000039275257 Message-Id: <87lgttw0z1.fsf@linux.vnet.ibm.com> X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:, , definitions=2017-01-30_04:, , signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 spamscore=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1612050000 definitions=main-1701300063 X-BeenThere: openbmc@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Development list for OpenBMC List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2017 05:50:22 -0000 Adriana Kobylak writes: >>> PNOR: >>> * Ability to =E2=80=98patch=E2=80=99 by copying a Hostboot image *.bin = into a designated directory (/usr/local/ for example). >>=20 >> Would it be good to add support for opkg-based packaging to incrementall= y (hotfix) system's update? I use it in OpenWRT. > > It is a good point, for this we=E2=80=99d need a read-write filesystem to > contain the code, and be more formal in updating the revision number > in bitbake for the images (currently is set to 0). But since our > current use case is about applying temporary (development) patches, > not permanent fixes, these changes wouldn=E2=80=99t be a priority at the > moment. Also for PNOR images, we don=E2=80=99t own the packaging process = (it=E2=80=99s > done by the hostboot build). Err... actually by op-build ( https://github.com/open-power/op-build/ ) - and that's *only* for POWER. --=20 Stewart Smith OPAL Architect, IBM.