From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Peter Korsgaard Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2016 10:33:35 +0200 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH 01/15] fs: add genimage infra In-Reply-To: <20160413234135.6bf26795@free-electrons.com> (Thomas Petazzoni's message of "Wed, 13 Apr 2016 23:41:35 +0200") References: <1460577820-32164-1-git-send-email-ezequiel@vanguardiasur.com.ar> <1460577820-32164-2-git-send-email-ezequiel@vanguardiasur.com.ar> <570EBAE6.1080000@mind.be> <20160413234135.6bf26795@free-electrons.com> Message-ID: <87a8kwio80.fsf@dell.be.48ers.dk> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net >>>>> "Thomas" == Thomas Petazzoni writes: Hi, >> # Make sure the genimage dependencies appear in graph-depends >> show-targets: >> @echo $(ROOTFS_GENIMAGE_DEPENDENCIES) > But then is it really something that belongs to fs/ ? It really isn't a > filesystem. No, it is closer to the post-image script. Where do you suggest to move it? system/? >> However, I'm afraid that we're moving a bit too fast after all. There are >> several open issues still: >> >> - Do post-image scripts come before or after genimage? >> - What with the dosfstools/mtools dependency? >> - Should we support genimage.cfg files that are generated from a post-image script? >> - Should we support several genimage.cfg files, producing several images (e.g. a >> NAND and a SD image)? >> >> So, the current approach works well for the bundled defconfigs, but for real >> use cases I think it's a bit too limited to be practical after all. > Do we need to support all real use cases? I think we should support the > common use cases, and the more complicated use cases can be handled via > a special post-image script. That's really the general philosophy of > Buildroot IMO: handle the most common cases nicely, and leave enough > extension scripts/hooks to allow people to plug their scripts to handle > the more complicated/specific cases. Agreed, but it is good to think about the questions Arnout listed to think about what is really the common use case. The definition of the post-image script was to run something at the very end, so I think we should do genimage before post-image (even though I could imagine use cases for the opposite as well). For the dosfstools/mtools dependencies I think a simple sub option pulling them in is most sensible. Supporting multiple genimage.cfg files (like we do for device_tables / post-build / post-image, ..) IMHO makes sense and looks simple to do. -- Venlig hilsen, Peter Korsgaard