[Buildroot] [git commit master 1/1] initramfs: update help text

[Peter Korsgaard <jacmet@uclibc.org>]

>>>>> "Thomas" == Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com> writes:

 Thomas> On Sun, 27 Jun 2010 08:22:56 +0200
 Thomas> Peter Korsgaard <jacmet@uclibc.org> wrote:

 >> No, but you could extract the tarball (as root or using fakeroot) and
 >> point CONFIG_INITRAMFS_SOURCE to it.
 >> 
 >> But yes, providing a way to generate the cpio archive without building a
 >> kernel would be nicer.

 Thomas> Well, a cpio archive can be generated by Buildroot without having to
 Thomas> build a kernel, see fs/cpio/Config.in. What Grant was complaining about
 Thomas> originally was the fs/initramfs case. However, last time I tried
 Thomas> pointing CONFIG_INITRAMFS_SOURCE to a cpio archive, it didn't work.

So what is the difference between initramfs and cpio? Just the
integration with the kernel build for the first? Maybe the initramfs
stuff should simply be a 'embed in kernel' question on the cpio package
if the internal kernel build is enabled?

 Thomas> Instead of my original solution, another solution would be to
 Thomas> *not* make initramfs depend on BR2_LINUX_KERNEL, and to remove
 Thomas> the dependency initramfs-> kernel so that the kernel doesn't
 Thomas> try to be built as soon as initramfs is selected. If kernel is
 Thomas> selected, it will anyway be built *before* going through the
 Thomas> initramfs code.

 Thomas> Would this be ok ?

What would then be the difference between this and the cpio target?
 
-- 
Bye, Peter Korsgaard