Re: apex-1.4.5
On Sat, Aug 19, 2006 at 06:48:38AM +0930, Rod Whitby wrote:
> Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> > Below is the patch used to create this image. Rod, can you please
> > review?
>
> Comments inline.
>
> > --- slugimage~ 2006-08-04 22:52:24.000000000 +0200
> > +++ slugimage 2006-08-18 19:17:37.000000000 +0200
> > @@ -39,12 +39,13 @@
> > use strict;
> > use warnings;
> >
> > -use Getopt::Long;
> > +use Getopt::Long qw(:config no_ignore_case);
> > use POSIX qw(tmpnam);
> >
> > my($debug) = 1;
> > my($quiet) = 0;
> > my($block_size) = 0x00020000;
> > +my(@cleanup);
> >
> > # The last 70 bytes of the SercommRedBootTrailer (i.e. excluding MAC
> > # address). Needed to create an image with an empty RedBoot partition
> > @@ -582,6 +583,16 @@
> > # Pack and append the binary table entry for this partition.
> > $partition_data .= createPartitionEntry($_->{'name'}, $_->{'offset'} + $flash_start, $_->{'size'});
>
> Let's add the data_size entry in here now too.
>
> > + # Optionally put a skip header into the padding area.
> > + if (defined $_->{'skip'}) {
> > + my $i = 1;
>
> Can we initialise $i to the number of skips (use "scalar @...") and then
> decrement? Then the skip entries end up in the same order as they are
> defined in slugimage.
Note that APEX doesn't care about the order of the skips. It sorts
them by offset.
> > + 'header'=>($loader ? 0 : 16)},
>
> I'd prefer to *always* put a header on the Ramdisk partition. The stock
> Ramdisk partition has a header, so we should keep it for compatibility
> (to ease upstream and downstream tools that need to deal with Ramdisks
> presented to either RedBoot-based or APEX-bsaed systems.
Um. Wasn't this what we were just talking about. Once the system
uses APEX, there isn't a good reason to keep the header. The system
cannot be booted without APEX, so ...
I perfer to drop the SERCOMM header because it is an abomination.
Everything needed can be present in the partition table.
Also, we *just* asked Martin to remove the ramdisk partition header.
Reply to: