Re: [ptxdist] lndir'ing sysroot-target

[Erwin Rol <mailinglists@erwinrol.com>]

Hey all,

On 6-11-2011 11:33, Michael Olbrich wrote:

>> Or did I misunderstand something?
>
> But the only difference is 2 images vs. 1, right? That's not quite that
> simple. We can easily add an option to not include the ipkgs from the base
> system. However the resulting image needs to be mounted somewhere. To do
> this right we would need to strip the mount point from the paths when
> creating the image. Otherwise the prefix when building and running wont
> match.
> The question is why do you want 2 images? Unless you add some ugly hacks
> you probably need to add some stuff to /etc anyway (e.g. init scripts).

The two images is not only about "two images" it is also a 
organizational boundary.  The OS is created, installed on the hardware 
and than that finished product is handed to someone that will develop 
applications that run on it.  How those applications are installed is a 
solvable detail.

>> PS: is there any documentation on how those mentioned feature should
>> work, cause the "Help" in ptxdist isn't really helpful.
>
> Unfortunately not. That would require several pages od documentation and
> and nobody is really happy with how these features work anyways...
> The main problem is, that I have yet to find two people that agree on how
> something like this is supposed to work. And while we could probably
> implement a lot of these variations, it would create (or rather already is)
> a configuration nightmare that only a few experts can handle.

This sounds like an point where ptxdist could/should be improved. 
Ptxdist is in my eyes a bit to monolithic  (source -> magic -> images). 
It would be really nice to be able to hook into certain parts, like the 
image generation, without to much black magic.  I really would like to 
see Ptxdist move forwards (and not just under the hood).  But that 
discussion could become a very large thread I guess.

- Erwin

-- 
ptxdist mailing list
ptxdist@pengutronix.de