On Wed, 19 Jan 2011 15:58:34 +0100, Loïc Minier <loic.min...@linaro.org> wrote: > Hmm maybe the wording was poor, but it's definitely the intent that the > hwpacks be kept as portable across image types as possible.
Right, I agree with the goal. My comment is just the wording, talk about the aim, not about "avoiding .debs" or something. > I think it can be either way; I don't care too strongly. We could say > "extra_boot_files", but then we might not know it's a x-loader anymore. > Imagine that we'd use the hwpack as a source to boot a board over a > serial line, we might have to send the MLO first, and then u-boot. If > we move to extra_boot_files we can't do that anymore. It's a judgment > call really. That's a reasonable justification. > > fdt > > > > What would we do with this if we found it in a hwpack? > > I don't know; I need more handson experience with DT to tell. It might > be that we don't need this this cycle because the DT will be embedded > in the zImage. Otherwise, we'd have to mkimage it along uImage and > uInitrd, probably in a uFdt or something like that, and then change the > boot script to pass it to the kernel. Ok. If we can get a definite list of steps then we can include it in v2, if not then we leave it out. > > linux_image > > > > I don't think there's any point in ignoring this now, and then doing > > something with it later. It should have a hwpack format bump so that > > users can be told that they need a newer l-m-c, otherwise when we first > > release Android hwpacks people will generate unbootable images. > > So "old" l-i-t will bail out against new hwpacks again? If we could > allow them to continue working, that would be nicer IMO Right, but what would they do? That's my point. If you really want to push Andoid in to v2 then we can write code to identify/specify image type, then defer Android/linux_image combination with a specific error message. The point of a format specifier is such that l-i-t won't try to act on things that are added after that version was released. If the old code won't do the wrong thing then we don't need a format bump. Thanks, James _______________________________________________ linaro-dev mailing list linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
