** Changed in: efikamx
Status: New = Won't Fix
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/671027
Title:
Add Efika MX Smartbook/Smarttop support
To manage notifications about this bug go
** Changed in: ubiquity
Status: New = Invalid
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/671027
Title:
Add Efika MX Smartbook/Smarttop support
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
** Branch linked: lp:ubuntu/flash-kernel
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/671027
Title:
Add Efika MX Smartbook/Smarttop support
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
On Mon, Mar 07, 2011, Matt Sealey wrote:
The reason I want this in there is because right now, we run Ubuntu.
Or rather you base on Ubuntu; let's call that some kind of mini Ubuntu
derivative.
We do not want to wait around
while Canonical, Linaro
** Changed in: flash-kernel
Status: New = Invalid
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/671027
Title:
Add Efika MX Smartbook/Smarttop support
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
I removed the task on the upstream project as it doesn't track bugs in
Launchpad (but in Debian) and uploaded the original proposal of not
checking subarch (initial version of the code).
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
Yes, we run what you might consider a fork of Maverick with about 5
packages different, and about 10 on top.. but the fact is we use the
vast majority of the Ubuntu archive for the convenience of our
customers. The less we change the better the board gets supported. If
Ubuntu wants to support it
I should also mention, let me reiterate the first comment in this bug,
and our experience with the Linaro kernel support, that the supplied
boot scripts were totally incorrect behavior for our board. Nobody
consulted us on this. Consider this consulting work for Linaro - we
fixed the boot script
Attaching a patch which I have tested extensively which restores the
-efikamx subarch and also makes the script work to our basic
specifications. I did capitulate to the new boot.script method but we
can properly handle kernel versions. It is amazing what a little bit of
'sed' can do.
Also fixes
boot.script to go with the previous patch. Drop it in /boot.
** Attachment added: boot.script source file
https://bugs.launchpad.net/efikamx/+bug/671027/+attachment/1890546/+files/boot.script
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed
+ ukfile=/boot/uImage-${kvers}
+ uifile=/boot/uInitrd-${kvers}
while this sounds like a good idea, I think this is too wide-ranging:
nothing is going to cleanup the accumulated uImage/uInitrd files, and
ABI changes are fairly frequent. I personally don't think we should add
fancy
actually, I hadn't read the rest carefully enough:
+ eval sed -i'.bak' -e's,%KERNELVERSION%,$kvers,g'
$tmp.boot.script
+ eval sed -i'.bak' -e's,%ROOTPARTITION%,$rootfs,g'
$tmp.boot.script
it's not clear to me which piece of code will write the boot.script, nor
why
When will this resync occur? I keep hearing it being thrown around a s
a reason to not implement features but nothing seems to be being done to
make it happen. The other reason we are proposing this change here is
because linaro supports like 3 boards and Debian supports ~40. We can
make the
Not being able to remove kernels generated is a flaw in the fundamental
way flash-kernel is written. We discussed this. It needs to act like
update-initramfs but it doesn't. Adding more and more hacks to work
around it is just that - more and more hacks.
There is one reason and one reason only
What I'm asking is for you guys to give us a break so we can move on to
other things.. :)
Flash-Kernel NG is almost done, I just have to port a bunch of plugins
and find the Debian maintainers so we can drive it upstream. Some of the
things in there I am not sure are even used, and a lot of the
Additional comment: Loic, PLEASE can we put back efikamx subarch
support? It would be a legacy hack but it will mean our current kernels
work. I don't want to have to build a vendor-specific package and track
it for the sake of 2 lines. Neither Maverick nor Natty has or will have
an mx51 subarch
Hey
On Thu, Mar 03, 2011, Matt Sealey wrote:
Okay I have some problems with the support committed to flash-kernel,
namely
* it doesn't differentiate between kernel versions, so uImage and
uInitrd will overwrite any older uImage and uInitrd version. This is
unfriendly and it is impossible to
I was under the impression that flash-kernel, as a subordinate of
update-initramfs or at the very least kernel postinst.d hook, is ALWAYS
called with a version (in fact, standards state that it passes the
kernel version as $1 AND $2 for some funky reason). There's very very
little reason to call
For reference this is my untested hook for the Efika..
efikamx_flash_kernel() {
tmp=$(tempfile)
printf Generating kernel u-boot image... 2
mkimage -A arm -O linux -T kernel -C none -a 0x90008000 \
-e 0x90008000 -d $kfile $tmp.uImage 2 1/dev/null
Just a note: I think this is getting off topic for this bug; we should
only exchange on resolving this particular bug in a relatively simple
way; flash-kernel design discussions should be held elsewhere IMO.
On Thu, Mar 03, 2011, Matt Sealey wrote:
I was under the impression that flash-kernel,
On Thu, Mar 03, 2011, Matt Sealey wrote:
For reference this is my untested hook for the Efika..
In general, I find patches easier to review; will you test this new
version?
--
Loïc Minier
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to
On Thu, Mar 03, 2011, Loïc Minier wrote:
Debian #601789 describes related issue around running flash-kernel at
the right time. I think we want to dpkg-trigger flash-kernel from
update-initramfs and perhaps from linux' postinsts.
Sorry, that's Debian #550584
--
Loïc Minier
--
You
(BTW regarding last comment, if you guys approve I will submit a
patch...)
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/671027
Title:
Add Efika MX Smartbook/Smarttop support
--
ubuntu-bugs
Okay I have some problems with the support committed to flash-kernel,
namely
* it doesn't differentiate between kernel versions, so uImage and uInitrd will
overwrite any older uImage and uInitrd version. This is unfriendly and it is
impossible to tell at a glance (without using mkimage to list
Loic:
Feel free to re-enable check_subarch
Also remove any check for efikasb as a subarch, since it's all efikamx
now. That's the only reason check_subarch was disabled, because we had
two, and now we have one. For Natty it will stay -efikamx.
As for the extensions and tmpfile stuff, this was
This bug was fixed in the package flash-kernel - 2.28ubuntu14
---
flash-kernel (2.28ubuntu14) natty; urgency=low
[ Marcin Juszkiewicz ]
* Add Efika MX Smartbook/Smarttop support based on work done by Genesi.
(LP: #671027)
-- Oliver Grawert o...@ubuntu.com Thu, 17 Feb 2011
noticed a couple of things:
* #check_subarch would ideally be enabled and consistent with other
platforms, or removed entirely.
* tmpfile is not removed
* $tmpfile.someextension is an insecure construct (used in other places of the
script)
--
You received this bug notification because you are
OK, so what's next?
--
Add Efika MX Smartbook/Smarttop support
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/671027
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
nothing on your side, i will add the patch as soon as i'm done merging
the package (if not someone sends that patch to debian before)
as i said above :)
--
Add Efika MX Smartbook/Smarttop support
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/671027
You received this bug notification because you are a member
Please remember ubiquity contains flash-kernel too and there is another
detection script (flash-kernel-installer?) which needs the machine and
subarch added to it.
Those both shipped on the smartbook too.. I can send the patches if
needed but they are plainly obvious additions.
Btw why does
ubiquity doesnt contain a clone of flash-kernel, flash-kernel-installer
is what is used by the debian-installer scripts to set up a bootloader,
this is what ubiquity uses, please read the code closer ;)
dont worry about the proper inclusion of the patch, i will add all bits
needed for HW
For d-i, a special type of stripped down .debs is used (udebs) and these
are installed in special packages indices in the archive; these are not
supposed to be installed on an end-user system, only when creating d-i
images. However images using ubiquity are essentially like a installed
system, so
for u-boot it would be desirable to sync up with upstream, note that we
nowadays use the same source package for all u-boot's and it would be
nice to have the efika support in the same source tree instead of
getting another source package into the archive, please talk to linaro
(specifically
Oliver, I have to completely disagree with you that U-Boot source code
is even required for the board - let alone something based on mainline.
This is not some crazy little embedded board like Beagle where the
updates come fast and there are 10 forks, and to be honest we would be
doing a great
i dont know why you are raving so much now, i already said the patch
looks fine to me and i'll include it in our flash-kernel if it doesnt go
to debian before :)
flash-kernel is supporting separate partitions *by design*, there is
nothing wrong about it, its whole purpose it to adjust to specific
flash-kernel doesn't support seperate partitions by any design except to
put this in board-specific code. It's not global, it's duplicated every
time it's needed (and in this case it seems only on boards that can only
boot from vfat). We don't feel we need to support it. In any case if the
patch
dell systems dont have to ship the BIOS on disk ... think more like grub
here ;)
our image build system puts the u-boot.bin binary in place for arches
that dont boot from NAND, to have this binary available we need a
package ... if your platform doesnt need u-boot.bin on the SD thats
indeed a
Oliver, it is our intent that /boot always be an ext2 partition.
We are phasing out support for booting from vfat partitions as
recommended practise in so far as it's only in U-Boot to keep old
systems working before migrating partitions to ext2. Once we release
U-Boot 2.0.6 for both boards,
BTW commenting our check_running_subarch is also only there because
Smartbook still uses the efikasb subarch, and will move to the
efikamx subarch shortly.
** Also affects: ubiquity
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
--
Add Efika MX Smartbook/Smarttop support
Adding Ubiquity as being affected as it seems to include flash-kernel.
--
Add Efika MX Smartbook/Smarttop support
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/671027
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
what is the reason for the rm -f after using mv ? do you not trust mv to
move the files ?
--
Add Efika MX Smartbook/Smarttop support
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/671027
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs
oops, forgot to remove that line
what do you think about patch overall?
--
Add Efika MX Smartbook/Smarttop support
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/671027
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
overall it looks fine to me if the prerequisites are fulfilled (i.e.
/boot/boot.script needs to exist)
do you actually want to have uInitrd/uImage in /boot given that /boot can not
be a vfat i would
suggest using the same solution we use on the preinstalled images and have a
hidden or non-data
** Patch added: flash-kernel.debdiff
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/671027/+attachment/1723013/+files/flash-kernel.debdiff
--
Add Efika MX Smartbook/Smarttop support
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/671027
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is
** Tags added: armel
--
Add Efika MX Smartbook/Smarttop support
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/671027
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
** Tags added: patch
--
Add Efika MX Smartbook/Smarttop support
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/671027
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
46 matches
Mail list logo
