All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
To: Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@bgdev.pl>,
	Khem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com>,
	 Armin Kuster <akuster808@gmail.com>,
	Jerome Neanne <jneanne@baylibre.com>,
	 Quentin Schulz <quentin.schulz@streamunlimited.com>
Cc: Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@baylibre.com>,
	openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] image.bbclass: support two-stage deployment of image artifacts
Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2020 17:12:57 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <21fcbda1e8b274ba75534159179ca9535c618d68.camel@linuxfoundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200319164403.29605-1-brgl@bgdev.pl>

On Thu, 2020-03-19 at 17:44 +0100, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@baylibre.com>
> 
> This is a follow-up to the discussion I started on the OE-core
> mailing
> list a couple days ago[1]. These patches propose to split the
> deployment
> of image artifacts into two stages where the first one includes all
> "regular" images and takes place before do_image_complete and the
> second
> is mostly aimed at wic right now and happens after do_image_complete.
> 
> These patches work but I'm sending them as RFC mostly to continue the
> discussion about possible solutions for the circular dependencies
> between
> the rootfs and initramfs.
> 
> [1] 
> http://lists.openembedded.org/pipermail/openembedded-core/2020-March/294094.html

This works fine until we have some new image type which then has to
depend on happening after wic. We then add a three stage process and so
on. Basically this feels like we're hardcoding something for one
specific use case which will later break and not scale to other
problems/solutions.

Sorry, I'm not convinced this is the right way to move forward. I will
try and have a think about what the right way is but sadly I don't get
much time to spend on specific problems like this :(

Cheers,

Richard



  parent reply	other threads:[~2020-03-19 17:12 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-03-19 16:44 [RFC PATCH 0/2] image.bbclass: support two-stage deployment of image artifacts Bartosz Golaszewski
2020-03-19 16:44 ` [RFC PATCH 1/2] image.bbclass: add an intermediate deploy task Bartosz Golaszewski
2020-03-19 16:44 ` [RFC PATCH 2/2] image.bbclass: deploy artifacts in two stages Bartosz Golaszewski
2020-03-19 16:49 ` [RFC PATCH 0/2] image.bbclass: support two-stage deployment of image artifacts Bartosz Golaszewski
2020-03-19 17:12 ` Richard Purdie [this message]
2020-03-19 18:20   ` Bartosz Golaszewski
2020-03-19 23:38     ` Richard Purdie
2020-03-20 13:11       ` Bartosz Golaszewski

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=21fcbda1e8b274ba75534159179ca9535c618d68.camel@linuxfoundation.org \
    --to=richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=akuster808@gmail.com \
    --cc=bgolaszewski@baylibre.com \
    --cc=brgl@bgdev.pl \
    --cc=jneanne@baylibre.com \
    --cc=openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org \
    --cc=quentin.schulz@streamunlimited.com \
    --cc=raj.khem@gmail.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.