From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alexey Brodkin Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2018 18:35:16 +0000 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH] support: Allow compression of sdcard.img In-Reply-To: <20180107230052.GB2774@scaer> References: <20171218135144.4000-1-didin@synopsys.com> <20180107230052.GB2774@scaer> Message-ID: <1515609315.3238.68.camel@synopsys.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net Hi Yann, On Mon, 2018-01-08 at 00:00 +0100, Yann E. MORIN wrote: > Evgeniy, All, > > On 2017-12-18 16:51 +0300, Evgeniy Didin spake thusly: > > In image files, generated by genimage.sh, there > > are tens of megabytes most of which might be filled > > with zeros as partitions are made a bit larger than > > needed for minimalictic rootfs (which allows users to > > add more libs and aps later on without messign with > > partition sizes). > > > > So adding an option for genimage.sh script, setting which > > we gzip image file and greatly reduce it size. > > Sorry, I am not in favour if this. > > Today you're adding gzip compression (and by the way, -g is really > unusual for a compresion option, it usually is called -z), but tomorrow > someone will want xz compression, then another one will want lzo or lzip > or whatever... Well I'm not sure if the idea behind that move was clearly explained. The point was to generate larger first partition so users may squeeze more stuff there (like splashscreens/logos for U-Boot, larger uImage/zImage or a couple of them even) while keeping smaller footprint of the resulting artifact (sdcard.img.xxx). We were inspired by OpenWrt guys who compress images, see https://downloads.lede-project.org/releases/17.01.4/targets/brcm2708/bcm2710/lede-17.01.4-brcm2708-bcm2710-rpi-3-ext4-sdcard.img.gz as an example. > And then someone will want to add gpg signature and encryption or > whatnot... That's for sure :) > So, in such situation, I would argue that one should provide their > post-image script, that does whatever last-minute tweaks on the > generated image(s). Ok it's OK by me as well. > And by the way, this patch compreses the image, but does not remove the > original, so this is actually a loss of space. Sure, that should be addressed. > So I am not in favour of this patch, sorry. Anyways, thanks for the review! -Alexey