Ed Bartosh <ed.bart...@linux.intel.com> writes: >> >> The --extra-space and --overhead option did not had an effect to squashfs >> >> partitions. Although squashfs is read-only, it can be useful to allocate >> >> more space for the on-disk partition to avoid repartitioning of the whole >> >> disk when a new (and larger) squashfs image is written on later updates. >> > >> > Is it possible to just use --size or --fixed-size in .wks to allocate >> > partition of certain size? >> >> --fixed-size works with this patch (tested); --size should work. > > Sorry for not being clear. Why do we need this if we can use --size to > explicity specify partition size?
--size and --fixed-size did not had an effect for squashfs with the old code. > --extra-space and --overhead have the same meaning as > IMAGE_ROOTFS_EXTRA_SPACE and IMAGE_OVERHEAD_SIZE variables. From my > point of view their purpose is to allocate additional space on the > file system. This doesn't make sense for squashfs. That's the reason > those options are not used for squashfs. Using them to implicitly make > bigger partition is a questionable and possible confusing approach. I want/need it to allow updates of the running system without complete repartitioning. E.g. at wic creation time, the squashfs has a certain size. Sometime in the future, there are needed e.g. 5 MiB more because a new package was added or so. I need to reserve space in the partition so that I can 'dd' the new image without a complete repartitioning. --extra-space/--overhead has the meaning which I want (e.g. to say "reserve +20% for changes in the future"). >> I would keep it as is. It is a non trivial function which is reusable. >> Perhaps, somebody adds CRAMFS or another file system which does not >> support extending its size. >> > > I personally find this much more understandable and logical: me not ;) As I said, functionality is perfect for putting into an extra method and it makes code much more readable. When somebody implements CRAMFS he can use this method instead of copy&pasting the code. > Then introducing a method that will be called for all supported > filesystems except squashfs without any effect. You mean, function should be called at the end of prepare_rootfs() (after "method(...)")? Yes, it would reduce code duplication but other methods needs to be touch too (to give information whether rootfs size has been adjusted already). Enrico -- SIGMA Chemnitz GmbH Registergericht: Amtsgericht Chemnitz HRB 1750 Am Erlenwald 13 Geschaeftsfuehrer: Grit Freitag, Frank Pyritz 09128 Chemnitz -- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core