On Sat, 2017-07-01 at 16:48 -0500, Alejandro Hernandez wrote: > > On 07/01/2017 10:09 AM, Patrick Ohly wrote: > > Is it really intended that do_image_wic runs for > > core-image-tiny-initramfs? How and where is the output of > > core-image-tiny-initramfs used? > Yes, do_image_wic is intended to run automatically, hence why wic was > added to IMAGE_FSTYPES > I'm not sure I understand what you mean by the second question, but the > output is just as in any other image
My point was that core-image-tiny-initramfs isn't like other *-initramfs image recipes at all, and having an outdated DESCRIPTION in it doesn't help much either. > > From the DESCRIPTION: > > > > core-image-tiny-initramfs doesn't actually generate an image but > > rather generates boot and rootfs artifacts into a common > > location that can subsequently be picked up by external image > > generation tools such as wic. > This is the old description, when it was though that we would have a common > artifacts directory, which never happened due to some changes in wic > last year > after which it was decided that core-image-tiny-initramfs would generate > the artifacts > AND a wic image. If that remains the solution (see below), will the DESCRIPTION and perhaps even the file name be changed? > > I still think your patch breaks images which use the initrd parameter to > > reference an initrd produced by some other recipe. > I see your point, if an initrd is produced by some other recipe it'd be > somewhere else, but at the same time, what if an initrd is produced by > the image recipe itself?, like in this case I see two solutions: 1) keep using the recipe as currently intended and add another sourceparam to bootimg-efi.py which changes the default source for initrd from DEPLOY_DIR_IMAGE (the current behavior) to IMGDEPLOYDIR 2) use two recipes, one for the initramfs (the current core-image-tiny-initramfs.bb, but without wic in IMAGE_FSTYPES) and a separate core-image-tiny.bb where do_rootfs gets replaced with an empty stub I personally find the second solution cleaner. It's the standard way of doing image + initramfs and thus will be easier to understand and have less unexpected pitfalls. One such pitfall in solution one exists even with your current patch: do_image_wic does not depend on do_image_cpio (run "bitbake -g core-image-tiny-initramfs:do_image_wic", "grep '^.core-image-tiny-initramfs.do_image_wic' task-depends.dot") and thus there's a race condition between the two tasks of the same recipe. That can be fixed, of course, but it is making the solution even more unusual. -- 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. -- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core