Re: [yocto] hddimg vs hdddirect?

[K Richard Pixley]

On 3/16/16 21:37 , Gary Thomas wrote:

On 03/16/2016 08:40 PM, K Richard Pixley wrote:

What's the intended difference between hddimg and hdddirect?

I'm confused about the intent here. The data flow in previous releases,
even jethro, seems to be somewhat confused/broken so looking at the
source code isn't really helping here.

Is one intended to be a simple syslinux bootable image while the other
is a "live" image with multiple boot choices?

In master... How does one go about requesting either a vmdk of a live
image or a directly bootable vmdk?


I'm not sure the difference between the .hddimg and .hdddirect.
I tried converting a .hddimg to .vdi or .vmdk using the VBoxManage
tool, but that didn't come up - there was a message about (paraphrased)
"waiting for removable media to become ready"  and the boot just hung up

However, I do know that .vmdk will boot easily with VirtualBox
Just add this to your local.conf
  IMAGE_FSTYPES += " vmdk"

Note: as mentioned in the documentation, you must use += as
IMAGE_FSTYPES_append will not do.
That hasn't worked for me yet on any branch I've tried.  Some build.  
None boot even past syslinux.  A variety of errors.


That's why I'm asking about intent and/or design.  If there's a plan, 
perhaps I can chip in.  But perhaps there is no concerted effort nor 
well known plan, in which case I can probably invent one if I can 
appreciate the relevant contexts.


In particular, *which* hdd should vmdk be an image of?  hddimg, (which 
builds and boots prior to master), or hdddirect, (which doesn't boot for 
me at all so I don't even know what it's intended to do)?  How do I get 
the old, single syslinux boot target hddimg, (the one that works), out 
of master?


--rich
--
___
yocto mailing list
yocto@yoctoproject.org
https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto

[yocto] hddimg vs hdddirect?

[K Richard Pixley]

What's the intended difference between hddimg and hdddirect?

I'm confused about the intent here. The data flow in previous releases,
even jethro, seems to be somewhat confused/broken so looking at the
source code isn't really helping here.

Is one intended to be a simple syslinux bootable image while the other
is a "live" image with multiple boot choices?

In master... How does one go about requesting either a vmdk of a live
image or a directly bootable vmdk?

--rich
-- 
___
yocto mailing list
yocto@yoctoproject.org
https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto

Re: [yocto] Problems building live image

[K Richard Pixley]

On 3/14/16 15:58 , Rudolf Streif wrote:

Richard,

On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 1:55 PM, K Richard Pixley <r...@noir.com 
<mailto:r...@noir.com>> wrote:


If I add that line, (

IMAGE_FSTYPES = "vmdk"

), to my local.conf, I get:

rich@burgess> time bitbake core-image-minimal
ERROR:  OE-core's config sanity checker detected a potential
misconfiguration.
Either fix the cause of this error or at your own risk
disable the checker (see sanity.conf).
Following is the list of potential problems / advisories:

Error, IMAGE_FSTYPES vmdk and live can't be built together


Summary: There was 1 ERROR message shown, returning a non-zero
exit code.

Building yocto-2.0 for genericx86-64.  What am I doing wrong?

Nothing really. The issue is conflicting SYSLINUX_LABELS for the boot 
options. For the live image the labels are boot and install while 
there is only boot for the vmdk image. Prior to 2.0 Jethro you could 
specify both, live and vmdk, in IMAGE_FSTYPES. It built both but the 
live image was missing the install boot option (it had two boot 
options instead). This function in syslinux.bbclass now flags the issue:


# Some of the vars for vm and live image are conflicted, this function
# is used for fixing the problem.
def syslinux_set_vars(d, suffix):
   vars = ['SYSLINUX_ROOT', 'SYSLINUX_CFG', 'LABELS', 'INITRD']
   for var in vars:
   var_with_suffix = var + '_'+ suffix
   if d.getVar(var, True):
   bb.warn('Found potential conflicted var %s, please use %s 
rather than %s'% \

   (var, var_with_suffix, var))
   elif d.getVar(var_with_suffix, True):
   d.setVar(var, d.getVar(var_with_suffix, True))


 Technically, in my opinion, you should be able to build both at the 
same time. You may want to disable the sanity checker.

Thank you.

What stops us from building different boot labels for different images?  
That seems like the obvious choice.  Or perhaps, using "boot" for all 
syslinux images and adding "install" for "live" images.


--rich
-- 
___
yocto mailing list
yocto@yoctoproject.org
https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto

Re: [yocto] Problems building live image

[K Richard Pixley]

If I add that line, (

IMAGE_FSTYPES = "vmdk"

), to my local.conf, I get:

   rich@burgess> time bitbake core-image-minimal
   ERROR:  OE-core's config sanity checker detected a potential
   misconfiguration.
Either fix the cause of this error or at your own risk disable
   the checker (see sanity.conf).
Following is the list of potential problems / advisories:

Error, IMAGE_FSTYPES vmdk and live can't be built together


   Summary: There was 1 ERROR message shown, returning a non-zero exit
   code.

Building yocto-2.0 for genericx86-64.  What am I doing wrong?

--rich

On 3/13/16 23:09 , Khem Raj wrote:

just use IMAGE_FSTYPES = "vmdk" if you plan to use virtualbox and need
a raw image.

On Sun, Mar 13, 2016 at 10:16 PM, Gary Thomas  wrote:

I'd like to to some testing that qemu just doesn't seem up to
so I attempted to build a live ISO per the documentation. I
added these lines to local.conf:
   IMAGE_FSTYPES_genericx86 += "live"
   NOISO_genericx86 = "0"

When I try to build core-image-base I get this error:
   ERROR: INITRD_IMAGE_LIVE core-image-minimal-initramfs cannot use image
live, hddimg or iso.
   ERROR: Check IMAGE_FSTYPES and INITRAMFS_FSTYPES settings.
   ERROR: Failed to parse recipe:
/local/poky-cutting-edge/meta/recipes-core/images/core-image-minimal-initramfs.bb

I'm using a recent Poky checkout (d53413d3a8444c38a83ea37867c8af7754d8e702)

Am I just doing something wrong here? I was following this section of the
mega-manual:

   26.56. image-live.bbclass¶

   The image-live class supports building "live" images.

   Normally, you do not use this class directly. Instead, you add "live" to
IMAGE_FSTYPES.
   For example, if you were building an ISO image, you would add "live" to
IMAGE_FSTYPES,
   set the NOISO variable to "0" and the build system would use the
image-live class to
   build the ISO image.

I don't have any available hardware for this testing, so I thought
I'd use VirtualBox.  Is this a reasonable approach?  I want to use
a live ISO so I get a writable file system.  I tried just using the
.hddimage but that doesn't boot with VirtualBox :-(

To be clear, along with the additions above in local.conf, I tried:
   $ MACHINE=genericx86 bitbake core-image-base

Thanks for any ideas

--

Gary Thomas |  Consulting for the
MLB Associates  |Embedded world

--
___
yocto mailing list
yocto@yoctoproject.org
https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
-- 
___
yocto mailing list
yocto@yoctoproject.org
https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto

Re: [yocto] Problems building live image

[K Richard Pixley]

On 3/14/16 10:16 , Khem Raj wrote:

On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 10:11 AM, K Richard Pixley <r...@noir.com> wrote:

While we're on it...

Can anyone explain what a "live" image is intended to be?

it can either boot from the disk or you can run the installer to
install it to another media on your device.
How is that different from an ISO?  I mean, isn't that what an ISO image 
does?

(I haven't gotten a live image to "work", but I'm not entirely sure I know
what "work" means for a live image.)

what issues do you see ? may that can help answer this

Mostly build time issues with "live" conflicting with "vmdk" and the like.

Or how hdddirect is intended to be different from hddimg?

hdddirect is raw disk image.
I thought hddimg was a raw disk image.  If hdddirect is a raw disk 
image, then what's hddimg?


--rich
--
___
yocto mailing list
yocto@yoctoproject.org
https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto

Re: [yocto] Problems building live image

[K Richard Pixley]

While we're on it...

Can anyone explain what a "live" image is intended to be?

(I haven't gotten a live image to "work", but I'm not entirely sure I 
know what "work" means for a live image.)


Or how hdddirect is intended to be different from hddimg?

--rich
--
___
yocto mailing list
yocto@yoctoproject.org
https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto

Re: [yocto] Problems building live image

[K Richard Pixley]

On 3/13/16 22:16 , Gary Thomas wrote:

I'd like to to some testing that qemu just doesn't seem up to
so I attempted to build a live ISO per the documentation. I
added these lines to local.conf:
  IMAGE_FSTYPES_genericx86 += "live"
  NOISO_genericx86 = "0"

When I try to build core-image-base I get this error:
  ERROR: INITRD_IMAGE_LIVE core-image-minimal-initramfs cannot use 
image live, hddimg or iso.

  ERROR: Check IMAGE_FSTYPES and INITRAMFS_FSTYPES settings.
  ERROR: Failed to parse recipe: 
/local/poky-cutting-edge/meta/recipes-core/images/core-image-minimal-initramfs.bb


I'm using a recent Poky checkout 
(d53413d3a8444c38a83ea37867c8af7754d8e702)


Am I just doing something wrong here? I was following this section of 
the mega-manual:


  26.56. image-live.bbclass¶

  The image-live class supports building "live" images.

  Normally, you do not use this class directly. Instead, you add 
"live" to IMAGE_FSTYPES.
  For example, if you were building an ISO image, you would add "live" 
to IMAGE_FSTYPES,
  set the NOISO variable to "0" and the build system would use the 
image-live class to

  build the ISO image.

I don't have any available hardware for this testing, so I thought
I'd use VirtualBox.  Is this a reasonable approach?  I want to use
a live ISO so I get a writable file system.  I tried just using the
.hddimage but that doesn't boot with VirtualBox :-(

To be clear, along with the additions above in local.conf, I tried:
  $ MACHINE=genericx86 bitbake core-image-base

Thanks for any ideas
You can boot the .hddimg on VirtualBox by first converting it to vdi, 
(or vmdk), using:


qemu-img convert -O vdi foo.hddimg foo.vdi

The vmdk doesn't seem to work for me on VMware, oddly.  And adding vmdk 
to IMAGE_FSTYPES doesn't seem to work either as it is apparently built 
from hdddirect, (no clue why that's distinct from hddimg but it doesn't 
boot for me).


--rich
--
___
yocto mailing list
yocto@yoctoproject.org
https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto