Re: [PATCH 1/2] classes/image_types: add a variable to list available IMAGE_FSTYPE's

[Tom Rini <tom_rini@mentor.com>]

On 07/13/2011 04:24 AM, Richard Purdie wrote:
> On Tue, 2011-07-12 at 18:11 -0700, Tom Rini wrote:
>> On 07/12/2011 05:52 PM, Gary Thomas wrote:
>>> On 07/12/2011 06:44 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
>>>> On 07/12/2011 05:37 PM, Gary Thomas wrote:
>>>>> On 07/12/2011 05:38 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
>>>>>> On 07/12/2011 04:24 PM, Joshua Lock wrote:
>>>>>>> This is for use in the Hob GUI to enable the user to change the type
>>>>>>> of the
>>>>>>> generated image.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Joshua Lock<josh@linux.intel.com>
>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>    meta/classes/image_types.bbclass |    2 ++
>>>>>>>    1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> diff --git a/meta/classes/image_types.bbclass
>>>>>>> b/meta/classes/image_types.bbclass
>>>>>>> index 89a745c..29d7a57 100644
>>>>>>> --- a/meta/classes/image_types.bbclass
>>>>>>> +++ b/meta/classes/image_types.bbclass
>>>>>>> @@ -102,3 +102,5 @@ IMAGE_DEPENDS_cpio.xz = "xz-native"
>>>>>>>    IMAGE_DEPENDS_ubi = "mtd-utils-native"
>>>>>>>    IMAGE_DEPENDS_ubifs = "mtd-utils-native"
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> +# This variable is available to request which values are suitable
>>>>>>> for IMAGE_FSTYPES
>>>>>>> +IMAGE_TYPES = "jffs2 cramfs ext2 ext2.gz ext3 ext3.gz squashfs
>>>>>>> squashfs-lzma ubi ubifs"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Concept is fine, but please don't list ubi and ubifs just list ubi.
>>>>>
>>>>> Perhaps the [brokwn] rule to explicitly build ubifs should also be
>>>>> purged?
>>>>
>>>> Nope, that's how the ubi is created.  Essentially at the time anyhow, OE
>>>> didn't make it too easy to add in an image that needs to be in a
>>>> container to be used.  So we have the ubifs rule (yes, that needs a
>>>> cherry-pick from oe.dev) for 'advanced' users and the ubi rule to create
>>>> a simple ubi image.
>>>
>>> I might be missing something, but I don't see why this rule is necessary
>>> in image_types.bbclass:
>>>   IMAGE_CMD_ubifs = "mkfs.ubifs -r ${IMAGE_ROOTFS} -o
>>> ${DEPLOY_DIR_IMAGE}/${IMAGE_NAME}.ubifs.img ${MKUBIFS_ARGS}"
>>>
>>> Having it there leads to the confusion (I was) that ubifs was useful.
>>>
>>> At least for me, I can build ubi images with that rule removed.
>>
>> OK, refreshed my memory again.  We have ubifs (and it might indeed need
>> some quick kicking/fixing) target (a) since that's what was there to
>> start with, but not quite enough (b) for advanced users.  There is a
>> point to making a ubifs image which is when you're making a complex ubi
>> volume (either outside of OE or in your collection/layer that provides a
>> more complex ubinize conf).
>>
>> The problem in oe-core today is that we were using non-standard
>> extensions on the ubifs part to try and distinguish between usable
>> standalone files (ubi) and parts (ubifs).
> 
> Surely if you're doing this extra processing, you could just define the
> IMAGE_CMD_ubifs variable too?
> 
> I'm a little worried about having something there that is effectively
> unusable on its own...

Well, ubifs is unusable without being in a ubi contanier.   But a ubi
container can have anything in it, we just make a simple container to
give people a starting point.

-- 
Tom Rini
Mentor Graphics Corporation