From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Grant Edwards <grant.b.edwards@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2010 15:13:04 +0000 (UTC)
Subject: [Buildroot] [git commit master 1/1] initramfs: update help text
References: <20100626054529.9E7CE81E0B@busybox.osuosl.org>
	<i052d8$8up$1@dough.gmane.org> <87aaqh38vi.fsf@macbook.be.48ers.dk>
	<i06hjh$fj$2@dough.gmane.org> <87hbkp3sfz.fsf@macbook.be.48ers.dk>
	<20100627093056.5635ce90@surf> <87aaqg452f.fsf@macbook.be.48ers.dk>
	<871vbs44p1.fsf@macbook.be.48ers.dk> <i08rds$vue$2@dough.gmane.org>
Message-ID: <i0ae60$t0c$1@dough.gmane.org>
List-Id: <buildroot.busybox.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: buildroot@busybox.net

On 2010-06-28, Grant Edwards <grant.b.edwards@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 2010-06-27, Peter Korsgaard <jacmet@sunsite.dk> wrote:

>>  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.
>>
>> Peter> So what is the difference between initramfs and cpio? Just the
>> Peter> integration with the kernel build for the first? Maybe the initramfs
>> Peter> stuff should simply be a 'embed in kernel' question on the cpio package
>> Peter> if the internal kernel build is enabled?
>>
>> Ok, looked a bit closer and noticed that the initramfs target doesn't
>> actually create a cpio, but a command file for gen_init_cpio.
>
> Right.  But why does that require building a kernel?  It's just a list
> of files/nodes that goes into the cpio archive.  If you're allowed to
> build a cpio archive or a tar archive, surely you should be allowed to
> build the list of files that goes into the archive?
>
>> Nevertheless, is there any advantage to use that instead of just
>> creating a cpio archive (besides it not working for you somehow)?
>
> If the cpio archive works, then I'm happy.  For no particular reason
> I've always used the file-list method in the past.  I tried building
> the kernel with the cpio archive instead, and the build worked fine.
> But, my target HW seems to have gone walkabout for a few days, so I
> haven't been able to test the impage built with the cpio archive
> instead of the source file list.

I've got target HW again, and building the kernel using a cpio archive
instead of the cpio-file-list seems to work fine, so that's what I'll
plan on doing.

I still don't understand why one can build a cpio archive without
building a kernel, but in order to create a list of what's in the cpio
archive a kernel must be built.

-- 
Grant Edwards               grant.b.edwards        Yow! I'm sitting on my
                                  at               SPEED QUEEN ... To me,
                              gmail.com            it's ENJOYABLE ... I'm WARM
                                                   ... I'm VIBRATORY ...