From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from majordomo by infradead.org with local (Exim 3.03 #1) id 12xmto-0000OE-00 for mtd-list@infradead.org; Fri, 02 Jun 2000 09:33:48 +0100 Received: from gate.mvhi.com ([194.205.184.34] helo=server.axiom.internal ident=exim) by infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 3.03 #1) id 12xmtn-0000O6-00 for mtd@infradead.org; Fri, 02 Jun 2000 09:33:47 +0100 From: David Woodhouse In-Reply-To: References: To: Alexander Larsson Cc: Bjorn Wesen , Finn Hakansson , mtd@infradead.org, alan@redhat.com Subject: Re: JFFS - ready for submission into 2.[34]? Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Fri, 02 Jun 2000 09:33:45 +0100 Message-ID: <28185.959934825@devel2.axiom.internal> Sender: owner-mtd@infradead.org List-ID: alex@cendio.se said: > Possibly. But i suppose the real reason is that the current way would > be the way you normally use it in embedded systems (like those axis > are doing). You generate your root fs on the build machine, create a > jffs image and download it into the flash memory of the target system. Yeah, but it's still not imperative to create the image in one go from mkfs. We create our Linux (and even NT) workstations by just taking a dump of the filesystem after installation, and dd'ing that onto the target. That would work just as well for JFFS. Either way - once we get it working on NAND flash, and having to map round bad blocks, we're going to have difficulties with just dumping an image on to the flash anyway. -- dwmw2 To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe mtd" to majordomo@infradead.org