Well there must have been some list/gmail snafu, as I definitely don't have
this patch locally but patchwork has it.  I wonder what else I'm missing...

Ross

On 12 September 2016 at 16:26, André Draszik <git@andred.net> wrote:

> ping
>
> On Mo, 2016-09-05 at 09:34 +0100, André Draszik wrote:
> > The debugfs is supposed to be used in addition to the
> > normal image for debugging purposes, it doesn't make
> > sense to artificially limit its maximum size.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: André Draszik <git@andred.net>
> > ---
> >  meta/classes/image.bbclass | 6 ++++++
> >  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/meta/classes/image.bbclass b/meta/classes/image.bbclass
> > index 07bd2d6..cb7d06d 100644
> > --- a/meta/classes/image.bbclass
> > +++ b/meta/classes/image.bbclass
> > @@ -538,6 +538,12 @@ def get_rootfs_size(d):
> >      base_size += rootfs_alignment - 1
> >      base_size -= base_size % rootfs_alignment
> >
> > +    # Do not check image size of the debugfs image. This is not supposed
> > +    # to be deployed, etc. so it doesn't make sense to limit the size
> > +    # of the debug.
> > +    if (d.getVar('IMAGE_BUILDING_DEBUGFS', True) or "") == "true":
> > +        return base_size
> > +
> >      # Check the rootfs size against IMAGE_ROOTFS_MAXSIZE (if set)
> >      if rootfs_maxsize:
> >          rootfs_maxsize_int = int(rootfs_maxsize)
> --
> _______________________________________________
> Openembedded-core mailing list
> Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
> http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
>