On Sat, 23 Jul 2011 23:21:37 +0200, Ben Hutchings b...@decadent.org.uk wrote:
Non-text part: multipart/signed
I assumed that the configuration would be stored in a partition of the
bulk NAND flash used for the filesystem (and possibly specific kernel
and initrd partitions), which the kernel
o Eliminate symbolic links entirely and require boot loader hook
scripts to edit their configuration files
As much as I would like to support this, what about embedded systems
where the bootloader is in flash and does not have a configuration file
in the root filesystem at all? Right now, it
On Sat, 2011-07-23 at 17:16 +0200, Bdale Garbee wrote:
o Eliminate symbolic links entirely and require boot loader hook
scripts to edit their configuration files
As much as I would like to support this, what about embedded systems
where the bootloader is in flash and does not have a
On Sat, 23 Jul 2011 17:57:03 +0200, Ben Hutchings b...@decadent.org.uk wrote:
Non-text part: multipart/signed
Why would the user have to do that? Your hook script can do it.
I'm completely lost. How can a hook script update u-boot's path
definitions?
Unlike with EFI firmware where we have
On Sat, 2011-07-23 at 18:57 +0200, Bdale Garbee wrote:
On Sat, 23 Jul 2011 17:57:03 +0200, Ben Hutchings b...@decadent.org.uk
wrote:
Non-text part: multipart/signed
Why would the user have to do that? Your hook script can do it.
I'm completely lost. How can a hook script update u-boot's
On Sat, 2011-07-23 at 22:51 +0200, Bdale Garbee wrote:
On Sat, 23 Jul 2011 19:37:53 +0200, Ben Hutchings b...@decadent.org.uk
wrote:
Non-text part: multipart/signed
By writing to whichever flash partition they're in.
Oh, it's not in a partition like a disk partition...
I know that.
Is
On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 01:56, Stephen Powell zlinux...@wowway.com wrote:
...
o Eliminate symbolic links entirely and require boot loader hook
scripts to edit their configuration files
...
This seems to be the best alternative for me however IIRC there still
arches that depends on those links
On Tue, 2011-07-19 at 19:56 -0400, Stephen Powell wrote:
[...]
The last time I checked, the
do_symlinks = yes setting in /etc/kernel-img.conf was still honored by
the maintainer scripts for official stock Debian kernel image packages;
Still correct. And they also support making hard-links or
On Wed, 20 Jul 2011 04:52:59 -0400 (EDT), Ben Hutchings wrote:
Boot loaders *should not* maintain symbolic links, since that means
duplicating logic (and there are probably cases where multiple boot
loaders are installed and they may trip over each other).
I agree that if it's going to be
On Wed, 2011-07-20 at 07:39 -0400, Stephen Powell wrote:
On Wed, 20 Jul 2011 04:52:59 -0400 (EDT), Ben Hutchings wrote:
Boot loaders *should not* maintain symbolic links, since that means
duplicating logic (and there are probably cases where multiple boot
loaders are installed and they
On Wed, 20 Jul 2011 09:25:37 -0400 (EDT), Ben Hutchings wrote:
On Wed, 2011-07-20 at 07:39 -0400 (EDT), Stephen Powell wrote:
On Wed, 20 Jul 2011 04:52:59 -0400 (EDT), Ben Hutchings wrote:
Hook scripts will just perpetuate the use of the undocumented
/etc/kernel-img.conf.
Hmm. I don't
11 matches
Mail list logo
