On Fri, 2016-04-01 at 09:33 +0800, Robert Yang wrote: > > On 03/31/2016 09:16 PM, Patrick Ohly wrote: > > On Thu, 2016-03-31 at 13:40 +0800, Robert Yang wrote: > >> On 03/31/2016 01:18 PM, Patrick Ohly wrote: > >>> I'm not using bootimg.bbclass, so that argument does not apply. > >> > >> Sorry, I'm a little confused, did you mean that you only use vm image ? > > > > No. I'm using a custom image creation class which does not use > > bootimg.bbclass at all. > > Maybe I can help if you can show me the class.
https://github.com/ostroproject/meta-ostro/blob/master/meta-ostro/classes/image-dsk.bbclass As you can see, it uses INITRD. This can be replaced by INITRD_LIVE, but that's an API change in OE-core that hasn't been properly explained and might also affect other users. Therefore my question whether we can find a solution where INITRD still has the same effect as before. If that's not possible, then as discussed with Saul on chat, INITRD_LIVE also is a poor name for the (new?) API, and it would be better to use INITRD_HW, to indicate that this is the variable meant to be used for real hardware. -- Best Regards, Patrick Ohly The content of this message is my personal opinion only and although I am an employee of Intel, the statements I make here in no way represent Intel's position on the issue, nor am I authorized to speak on behalf of Intel on this matter. -- _______________________________________________ meta-intel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/meta-intel
