From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from ptx.hi.pengutronix.de ([2001:67c:670:100:1d::c0] ident=Debian-exim) by metis.ext.pengutronix.de with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1XtZIQ-0005ec-55 for ptxdist@pengutronix.de; Wed, 26 Nov 2014 10:54:02 +0100 Received: from mol by ptx.hi.pengutronix.de with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1XtZIQ-0004zD-3b for ptxdist@pengutronix.de; Wed, 26 Nov 2014 10:54:02 +0100 Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2014 10:54:02 +0100 From: Michael Olbrich Message-ID: <20141126095402.GD19664@pengutronix.de> References: <20140512105615.GH17745@pengutronix.de> <20140602104212.GP26228@pengutronix.de> <539f895a8febf8fd659beb7aa510c4e2@idefix.lespocky.dyndns.org> <12ff834efa2ac2ef3cc70f10e8680dcb@localhost> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <12ff834efa2ac2ef3cc70f10e8680dcb@localhost> Subject: Re: [ptxdist] new image rules (Was: PTXdist 2014.05.0 released) Reply-To: ptxdist@pengutronix.de List-Id: PTXdist Development Mailing List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: ptxdist-bounces@pengutronix.de Errors-To: ptxdist-bounces@pengutronix.de To: ptxdist@pengutronix.de Hi, On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 02:49:06PM +0100, Alexander Dahl wrote: > >>> What's the difference between the old and the new image rules and why > >>> should one use the one or the other? > >> > >> First of all, long-term I'd like to remove the old rules. So use the new > >> rules and yell here if you have a use-case that the new rules cannot > >> handle. > > > > We are using ubi and ubifs here and I tried it today after migration to > > ptxdist 2014.06.0. It does not work yet, I get a kernel panic after a > > factory reset with a new image. Digging deeper into this needs time I do > > not have at the moment. I'll have a look later if you don't mind. > > I had time for this today and I found the reason for this: with the old > rules there was PTXCONF_IMAGE_UBI_ROOT_VOL_NAME which was set to > 'rootfs0' here. With the new rules this parameter is gone and instead > there's a line 'name = "root"' hardcoded in config/images/ubifs.config > which lead to not mounting this and not finding that and so on. I could > fix this by adapting our uboot environment and startup scripts. > > I suppose I could also have copied the config/images/ubifs.config to our > BSP and edit the name there? Correct. That's the idea with the new image rules: Not to many options in the menu, but you can always overwrite the config file in the BSP. Michael -- Pengutronix e.K. | | Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 | Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 | -- ptxdist mailing list ptxdist@pengutronix.de