split mtd-utils

split mtd-utils

[Frans Meulenbroeks]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 654 bytes --]

Dear all,

As I am involved in embedded systems where flash is somewhat sparse I'm
always eager to save a few bytes where possible.

Today I noticed that mtd-utils (1.5.0 from danny) generates for my
architecture (powerpc) roughly 780k of binaries in usr/sbin. 423k of it is
due to ubifs related files.

Would it be desired to put this in a separate package?
e.g. mtd-utils-ubi and mtd-utils-nonubi with mtd-utils itself being empty
but rdepend on those two?
that way mtd-utils will still give all packages but those only wanting the
non ubi stuff can limit themselves to that.

If desired I can give this a stab.

Best regards, Frans.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 783 bytes --]

Re: split mtd-utils

[Richard Purdie]

On Wed, 2013-01-09 at 17:12 +0100, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote:
> As I am involved in embedded systems where flash is somewhat sparse
> I'm always eager to save a few bytes where possible.
>
> Today I noticed that mtd-utils (1.5.0 from danny) generates for my
> architecture (powerpc) roughly 780k of binaries in usr/sbin. 423k of
> it is due to ubifs related files.
>
> Would it be desired to put this in a separate package?
>
> e.g. mtd-utils-ubi and mtd-utils-nonubi with mtd-utils itself being
> empty but rdepend on those two?
> that way mtd-utils will still give all packages but those only wanting
> the non ubi stuff can limit themselves to that.
>
> If desired I can give this a stab.

Sounds like a sensible split to me...

Cheers,

Richard

Re: split mtd-utils

[Andrea Adami]

On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 6:17 PM, Richard Purdie
<richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> On Wed, 2013-01-09 at 17:12 +0100, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote:
>> As I am involved in embedded systems where flash is somewhat sparse
>> I'm always eager to save a few bytes where possible.
>>
>> Today I noticed that mtd-utils (1.5.0 from danny) generates for my
>> architecture (powerpc) roughly 780k of binaries in usr/sbin. 423k of
>> it is due to ubifs related files.
>>
>> Would it be desired to put this in a separate package?
>>
>> e.g. mtd-utils-ubi and mtd-utils-nonubi with mtd-utils itself being
>> empty but rdepend on those two?
>> that way mtd-utils will still give all packages but those only wanting
>> the non ubi stuff can limit themselves to that.
>>
>> If desired I can give this a stab.
>
> Sounds like a sensible split to me...
>
> Cheers,
>
> Richard
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Openembedded-core mailing list
> Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
> http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core

OE-Classic already has one packaging split:
PACKAGES =+ "mkfs-jffs2 mkfs-ubifs

Recently I faced this same issue: for ubiattach we have to install
full mtd-utils (>700KiB)
FYI there is a recipe for ubi-utils-klibc for more extreme size optimization.

http://cgit.openembedded.org/meta-openembedded/tree/meta-initramfs/recipes-devtools/mtd

Cheers

Andrea

Re: split mtd-utils

[Frans Meulenbroeks]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1731 bytes --]

Cool, I'll have a peek at the oe classic recipe and give it a stab along
the same spirit.

Best regards, Frans


2013/1/10 Andrea Adami <andrea.adami@gmail.com>

> On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 6:17 PM, Richard Purdie
> <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> > On Wed, 2013-01-09 at 17:12 +0100, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote:
> >> As I am involved in embedded systems where flash is somewhat sparse
> >> I'm always eager to save a few bytes where possible.
> >>
> >> Today I noticed that mtd-utils (1.5.0 from danny) generates for my
> >> architecture (powerpc) roughly 780k of binaries in usr/sbin. 423k of
> >> it is due to ubifs related files.
> >>
> >> Would it be desired to put this in a separate package?
> >>
> >> e.g. mtd-utils-ubi and mtd-utils-nonubi with mtd-utils itself being
> >> empty but rdepend on those two?
> >> that way mtd-utils will still give all packages but those only wanting
> >> the non ubi stuff can limit themselves to that.
> >>
> >> If desired I can give this a stab.
> >
> > Sounds like a sensible split to me...
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Richard
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Openembedded-core mailing list
> > Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
> > http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
>
> OE-Classic already has one packaging split:
> PACKAGES =+ "mkfs-jffs2 mkfs-ubifs
>
> Recently I faced this same issue: for ubiattach we have to install
> full mtd-utils (>700KiB)
> FYI there is a recipe for ubi-utils-klibc for more extreme size
> optimization.
>
>
> http://cgit.openembedded.org/meta-openembedded/tree/meta-initramfs/recipes-devtools/mtd
>
> Cheers
>
> Andrea
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2725 bytes --]

Re: split mtd-utils

[Frans Meulenbroeks]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2576 bytes --]

Along the lines of the oe classic patch I propose to split as follows:


mtd-utils-jffs2 package containing
jffs2dump
jffs2reader
mkfs.jffs2

mtd-utils-ubifs package containing:
mkfs.ubifs
ubiattach
ubicrc32
ubidetach
ubiformat
ubimkvol
ubinfo
ubinize
ubirename
ubirmvol
ubirsvol
ubiupdatevol

mtd-utils package containing:
docfdisk
doc_loadbios
flashcp
flash_erase
flash_eraseall
flash_lock
flash_otp_dump
flash_otp_info
flash_unlock
ftl_check
ftl_format
mtd_debug
mtdinfo
nanddump
nandtest
nandwrite
nftldump
nftl_format
recv_image
rfddump
rfdformat
serve_image
sumtool

Or do we need to make additional packages (like e.g. for (n)tfl )

Best regards, Frans




2013/1/10 Frans Meulenbroeks <fransmeulenbroeks@gmail.com>

> Cool, I'll have a peek at the oe classic recipe and give it a stab along
> the same spirit.
>
> Best regards, Frans
>
>
> 2013/1/10 Andrea Adami <andrea.adami@gmail.com>
>
>> On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 6:17 PM, Richard Purdie
>> <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>> > On Wed, 2013-01-09 at 17:12 +0100, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote:
>> >> As I am involved in embedded systems where flash is somewhat sparse
>> >> I'm always eager to save a few bytes where possible.
>> >>
>> >> Today I noticed that mtd-utils (1.5.0 from danny) generates for my
>> >> architecture (powerpc) roughly 780k of binaries in usr/sbin. 423k of
>> >> it is due to ubifs related files.
>> >>
>> >> Would it be desired to put this in a separate package?
>> >>
>> >> e.g. mtd-utils-ubi and mtd-utils-nonubi with mtd-utils itself being
>> >> empty but rdepend on those two?
>> >> that way mtd-utils will still give all packages but those only wanting
>> >> the non ubi stuff can limit themselves to that.
>> >>
>> >> If desired I can give this a stab.
>> >
>> > Sounds like a sensible split to me...
>> >
>> > Cheers,
>> >
>> > Richard
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Openembedded-core mailing list
>> > Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
>> > http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
>>
>> OE-Classic already has one packaging split:
>> PACKAGES =+ "mkfs-jffs2 mkfs-ubifs
>>
>> Recently I faced this same issue: for ubiattach we have to install
>> full mtd-utils (>700KiB)
>> FYI there is a recipe for ubi-utils-klibc for more extreme size
>> optimization.
>>
>>
>> http://cgit.openembedded.org/meta-openembedded/tree/meta-initramfs/recipes-devtools/mtd
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> Andrea
>>
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 4064 bytes --]

Re: split mtd-utils

[Eric Bénard]

Hi Frans,

Le Fri, 11 Jan 2013 09:40:43 +0100,
Frans Meulenbroeks <fransmeulenbroeks@gmail.com> a écrit :

> Along the lines of the oe classic patch I propose to split as follows:
> 
> 
> mtd-utils-jffs2 package containing
> jffs2dump
> jffs2reader
> mkfs.jffs2
> 
> mtd-utils-ubifs package containing:
> mkfs.ubifs
> ubiattach
> ubicrc32
> ubidetach
> ubiformat
> ubimkvol
> ubinfo
> ubinize
> ubirename
> ubirmvol
> ubirsvol
> ubiupdatevol
> 
> mtd-utils package containing:
> docfdisk
> doc_loadbios
> flashcp
> flash_erase
> flash_eraseall
> flash_lock
> flash_otp_dump
> flash_otp_info
> flash_unlock
> ftl_check
> ftl_format
> mtd_debug
> mtdinfo
> nanddump
> nandtest
> nandwrite
> nftldump
> nftl_format
> recv_image
> rfddump
> rfdformat
> serve_image
> sumtool
> 
IIRC sumtol is used for jffs2 images (to create the erase block
summary) so that may better fit into mtd-utils-jffs2

Also, nftl* rfd* doc* ftl* serve_image may go into a separate packate
(mtd-utils-misc ?) as I believe those tools are not very usefull in
most configurations using mtd with nowadays's flashs.

Eric

Re: split mtd-utils

[Frans Meulenbroeks]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1120 bytes --]

2013/1/11 Eric Bénard <eric@eukrea.com>

> Hi Frans,
>
> [...]

> IIRC sumtol is used for jffs2 images (to create the erase block
> summary) so that may better fit into mtd-utils-jffs2
>
> Also, nftl* rfd* doc* ftl* serve_image may go into a separate packate
> (mtd-utils-misc ?) as I believe those tools are not very usefull in
> most configurations using mtd with nowadays's flashs.
>
> Eric
>
Hi Eric,

Thanks for the feedback. I'm not into the details of all tools in the
package (I typically only use the flash* mtd* and jffs2 things)
Seems a good plan to me to put these in a misc package
(actually I also considered moving all other stuff that is in my proposal
in mtd-utils into a differently named package, e.g. mtd-utils-core) and
have mtd-utils as an umbrella package dragging in what it does now (so it
should RDEPEND on the meta-utils-* packages but have no other stuff in it).

Best regards, Frans.

PS: partially related: I have filed yocto bug 3702 asking for more
fine-grained control on what is included in an image.
https://bugzilla.yoctoproject.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3702

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1842 bytes --]

Re: split mtd-utils

[Frans Meulenbroeks]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1274 bytes --]

patch submitted.
Enjoy.
Frans


2013/1/11 Frans Meulenbroeks <fransmeulenbroeks@gmail.com>

>
>
>
> 2013/1/11 Eric Bénard <eric@eukrea.com>
>
>> Hi Frans,
>>
>> [...]
>
>> IIRC sumtol is used for jffs2 images (to create the erase block
>> summary) so that may better fit into mtd-utils-jffs2
>>
>> Also, nftl* rfd* doc* ftl* serve_image may go into a separate packate
>> (mtd-utils-misc ?) as I believe those tools are not very usefull in
>> most configurations using mtd with nowadays's flashs.
>>
>> Eric
>>
> Hi Eric,
>
> Thanks for the feedback. I'm not into the details of all tools in the
> package (I typically only use the flash* mtd* and jffs2 things)
> Seems a good plan to me to put these in a misc package
> (actually I also considered moving all other stuff that is in my proposal
> in mtd-utils into a differently named package, e.g. mtd-utils-core) and
> have mtd-utils as an umbrella package dragging in what it does now (so it
> should RDEPEND on the meta-utils-* packages but have no other stuff in it).
>
> Best regards, Frans.
>
> PS: partially related: I have filed yocto bug 3702 asking for more
> fine-grained control on what is included in an image.
> https://bugzilla.yoctoproject.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3702
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2310 bytes --]