From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mga09.intel.com ([134.134.136.24])
	by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72)
	(envelope-from <sgw@linux.intel.com>) id 1QPoia-0001nf-VN
	for openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org;
	Fri, 27 May 2011 06:32:14 +0200
Received: from orsmga002.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.21])
	by orsmga102.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 26 May 2011 21:29:07 -0700
X-ExtLoop1: 1
Received: from unknown (HELO [10.255.12.104]) ([10.255.12.104])
	by orsmga002.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 26 May 2011 21:29:07 -0700
Message-ID: <4DDF2893.7090306@linux.intel.com>
Date: Thu, 26 May 2011 21:29:07 -0700
From: Saul Wold <sgw@linux.intel.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US;
	rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110428 Fedora/3.1.10-1.fc13 Thunderbird/3.1.10
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer
	<openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org>
References: <cover.1306218459.git.sgw@linux.intel.com>	<1306443683.5911.1.camel@vorpal.jf.intel.com>	<4DDEC006.30701@linux.intel.com>	<201105262214.44529.paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com>
	<4DDF237C.20506@linux.intel.com>
In-Reply-To: <4DDF237C.20506@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Paul Eggleton <paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com>,
	Darren Hart <dvhart@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC 1/2] IMAGE_ROOTFS_SIZE Cleanup
X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer
	<openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org>
List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer
	<openembedded-core.lists.openembedded.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/openembedded-core>,
	<mailto:openembedded-core-request@lists.openembedded.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxtogo.org/pipermail/openembedded-core>
List-Post: <mailto:openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org>
List-Help: <mailto:openembedded-core-request@lists.openembedded.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core>,
	<mailto:openembedded-core-request@lists.openembedded.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 27 May 2011 04:32:14 -0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On 05/26/2011 09:07 PM, Darren Hart wrote:
>
>
> On 05/26/2011 02:14 PM, Paul Eggleton wrote:
>> On Thursday 26 May 2011 22:03:02 Darren Hart wrote:
>>> Yeah, this wasn't clear to me either. And my question in 2/2 still
>>> stands - what is the goal of the overhead factor?
>>
>> I think the thinking was that the more software you have installed to begin
>> with the more user data you're likely to need to store. Personally I think it
>> would be simpler if we just set some additional overhead as an absolute value
>
> I had the same thought, so "seconded".
>
It used to be that way and failed in unpredictable ways, what would work 
for one image would be way over kill for another or be too little, so 
the overhead factor works better.

If you want a known amount of space then you can use the 
IMAGE_ROOTFS_EXTRA_SPACE.

Sau!