[oe] [Angstrom-devel] [RFC] Get rid of adhoc machine-specific messing with [linux-handhelds-2.6] kernel packages
openembedded at hrw.one.pl
Fri Jan 5 09:41:45 CET 2007
Dnia czwartek, 4 stycznia 2007 20:03, Paul Sokolovsky napisał:
> >> 2) Argue to Angstrom maintainers to stop killing zImage from rootfs
> >> at all - consistently for all machines.
> > So we start to waste 1.2MB disk space on at least 50% of the machines
> > Angstrom supports? Thats a lot of space on a machine with a 32MB root
> > partition.
> It's not going to be waste, as it is supposed to be used by LAB,
> eventually. Also, while 1.2MB seems like a figure, here's the paradox -
> the difference of what you can fit into 32MB and 30.8MB is pretty
I can see difference in fitting in 14.4MB which collie offers (or 21-23M
of poodle, tosa, c700, c750). Keeping not needed files in rootfs hurts.
We currently have problems with generating rootfs small enough.
> In this regard, why not adopt another convention - instead of
> fitting yet another cool app, why not provide solid
> upgrade/bootloading/troubleshooting/diagnostics solution by default,
> and teach users that a kernel upgrade is piece of cake, you can't
> brick a device by doing that, and generally, Linux on PDA foundation
> is as solid as on desktop?
pdaX people tried to switch to u-boot on Zaurus line. Look into OESF
forums to check how many users failed to follow 'simple' 2 step reflash.
> > Also, it creates a user support problem. "I upgraded the zImage file
> > on my rootfs but my device still uses my old kernel?".
> Well, that's the crucial point. Could you gentlemen describe how you
> handle kernel upgrade on Zaurus now? I imagine it's shipping a separate
> zImage file together with some upgrade script, or rely on native
> bootloader to install it somehow.
On PXA models you flash two files: kernel and rootfs. Any of them can be
flashed without second one. There is a 'encrypted' script built by
zaurus-updater recipe which do it under rescue 2.4 system (kernel +
rootfs) which is stored in 2 others flash partitions.
> With my proposal to use full kernel-image packages it would
> be instead:
> 1. One does "ipkg install kernel-image"
> 2. One prays and with shaking hands runs
> "adhoc_kernel_update_script.sh /boot/zImage"
This step is impossible under 2.6 on Zaurus due to limitations of Sharp
> As for "user support problem", how that differs from what you have
> now? User installs empty kernel-image package and also doesn't get
> upgraded kernel. You likely solved this for Zaurus by telling users
> that installing kernel-image doesn't really upgrade their kernel.
> Well, "Zaurus" appears to be the keyword here.
Under OpenZaurus user gets message on boot that he run incorrect kernel.
I do not know will Angstrom adopt it or not.
> > Also, on the Zaurus it means wasting a couple of megabytes of flash
> > for the extra copies of kernels you'll need.
> As for LAB, that's exactly its strength - if you have support for
> some device (like funky flash) in kernel, LAB will be able to use it,
> as it's just kind of module for the kernel itself. The price of this
> is that LAB is indeed too big as for bootloader - ~1Mb instead of
> usual 256Mb/128Mb.
So why not u-boot or Apex? They are much smaller but maybe does not
provide some stuff which LAB do.
> > Machine config files set information that is specific to the machine.
> > Whether of not a given machine has a sucky bootloader is a property
> > of the machine.
> Point of view. It's all just point of view. Many-many people would
> consider you crazy for wanting to install something else, handmade,
> instead of vendor-carved-in stuff. But you smile and do just that. And
> yet you tell that /home partition and bootloader are carved in stone.
> But someone else will flash them away just as easily.
> That of course doesn't mean I disagree with the current
> state-of-affairs of mostly adhoc bootloaders to be used, and need to
> account for that somehow. It's just one day it may become a limitation
> to have it in machine config.
OE support machines in a way which maintainers want. If some Joe Dev
decided to change his machine to work in other way he is free to create
own variations of configs/recipes. Flash resizing needs changing kernel
CMDLINE which some bootloaders (like Zaurus one) does not support.
> Ok, so it's clear that Zaurus machines need to keep using existing
> methods, and those methods should not be touched. On the other hand, I
> hope I was able to argue that other machines might have other
> requirements. In this regard, I'll still need to argue to machine
> mentors of (PocketPC!) machines in question to drop
> FILES_kernel-image_MACH = "".
I'm open to changes for machines which CAN support it. I do not like to
have machine which do:
1. 1st stage bootloader (small, usually vendor provided)
2. 2nd stage bootloader (big LAB)
3. kernel (also big)
Think about booting time...
> But anyway, I think that ROOTFS_POSTPROCESS_COMMAND +=
> "remove_zimages; " thing is still useful. It doesn't mean that machines
> should switch to it, but it offers nice, potentially
> machine-independent, way to remove zImage file from the image.
Which will get back when user update kernel-image package. Which is BAD.
catholic god himself invented autotools just for amusement
first there was the great flood, then the plague, now autotools
More information about the Openembedded-devel