[Buildroot] [PATCH 5/5 v5] boot/systemd-boot: new package

[James Hilliard <james.hilliard1@gmail.com>]

On Wed, Dec 26, 2018 at 4:07 PM James Hilliard
<james.hilliard1@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Dec 26, 2018 at 3:41 PM Yann E. MORIN <yann.morin.1998@free.fr> wrote:
> >
> > Thomas, All,
> >
> > Adding Peter in the loop; see at the end.
> >
> > On 2018-12-26 22:23 +0100, Thomas Petazzoni spake thusly:
> > > On Wed, 26 Dec 2018 09:52:30 +0100, Yann E. MORIN wrote:
> > > > From: James Hilliard <james.hilliard1@gmail.com>
> > > >
> > > > systemd-boot is the integration of gummiboot into systemd, and gummiboot
> > > > is no longer maintained [0]. However, it is still interesting to use it
> > > > as a simple, stand-alone bootloader.
> > > >
> > > > Since systemd-boot is really part of systemd, when systemd is enabled
> > > > (as an init system), we rely on it to build the boot blobs, and
> > > > systemd-boot (this package) is not available.
> > > >
> > > > Now, when systemd is not enabled, systemd-boot (this package) will
> > > > actually build the boot blobs, and only that. No userspace tool is
> > > > built.
> > > >
> > > > To avoid duplication, we just symlink the systemd patches as-is. We just
> > > > need to add a specific patch, that just relaxes the dependency checks,
> > > > since we're only interested in building the boot blobs.
> > > >
> > > > [0] https://cgit.freedesktop.org/gummiboot/commit/?id=55df1539c9d330732e88bd196afee386db6e4a1d
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: James Hilliard <james.hilliard1@gmail.com>
> > >
> > > Do we have a serious valid use-case for wanting to use systemd-boot
> > > without systemd? This adds a fair bit of complexity, so I'd like to be
> > > sure of what we're doing here.
> > >
> > > An example of the complexity is with the symlinks to the patches. Every
> > > time a patch is added/removed in package/systemd/, one should remember
> > > to adjust the symlinks in boot/systemd-boot/. This is something that
> > > can very easily be missed.
> >
> > And I now even dropped all of them completely, with the v240 bump, so we
> > no longer whare any patch with systemd. There is only one patch that is
> > now needed to build systemd-boot standalone. We still need to investigate
> > why James was not able to build it, though. James, care to give my series
> > a new spin, please? (I've repushed the branch just now)
> Did a fresh compilation run, I get a failure here
> https://github.com/systemd/systemd/blob/v239/meson.build#L278
Correction: failure is here
https://github.com/systemd/systemd/blob/v240/meson.build#L293
> meson.build:293:8: ERROR:  Unknown compiler(s):
> [['/home/buildroot/buildroot/output/host/bin/i586-buildroot-linux-uclibc-g++']]
> >
> > So, the only complexity that remains is the sharing of the boot files
> > and their install commands.
> >
> > That, and the little trick to share the source file.
> >
> > > So it would be good to make sure we have a really solid use-case for
> > > adding this complexity.
> >
> > Peter, care to elaborate your position, since you were advocating also
> > for it, earlier? ;-)
> >
> > Regards,
> > Yann E. MORIN.
> >
> > --
> > .-----------------.--------------------.------------------.--------------------.
> > |  Yann E. MORIN  | Real-Time Embedded | /"\ ASCII RIBBON | Erics' conspiracy: |
> > | +33 662 376 056 | Software  Designer | \ / CAMPAIGN     |  ___               |
> > | +33 223 225 172 `------------.-------:  X  AGAINST      |  \e/  There is no  |
> > | http://ymorin.is-a-geek.org/ | _/*\_ | / \ HTML MAIL    |   v   conspiracy.  |
> > '------------------------------^-------^------------------^--------------------'