[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Bug#526640: Please try to keep the number of flashes minimal

Copying Joey and maks, who initially had the discussion about adding a
flash-kernel call to update-initramfs.  I hope they can comment on
your proposal.

* Loïc Minier <lool@dooz.org> [2009-05-02 21:14]:
> On Sat, May 02, 2009, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> > This is a long-standing problem (introduced a few months ago).  The
> > problem is that flash-kernel will add a postinst hook for the kernel,
> > but nowadays update-initramfs will call flash-kernel directly.
>  I was wondering whether we could take steps to move flash-kernel to a
>  trigger; I'm aware of earlier discussion on this topic on -boot.  We
>  rediscussed this recently on #ubuntu-arm and the discussion is on:
>     https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/365053
>     http://launchpadlibrarian.net/25876740/ubuntu-arm.txt
>  most of the discussion is about moving the logic in update-initramfs'
>  run_bootloader() -- at least the flash-kernel part -- in a new config
>  similar to kenrel-img.conf's postinst_hook.
>  I think it would be possible to make flash-kernel calls trigger a new
>  flash-kernel trigger which would do the real update; the flash-kernel
>  postinst, update-initramfs calls, and kernel installation would all
>  cause this trigger to be activated, and the flash-kernel would only
>  have to ensure that the update-initramfs trigger if any has completed.
>  Am I missing something?  Does this make any sense?
>    Thanks for comments,
> -- 
> Loïc Minier
> -- 
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-arm-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

Martin Michlmayr

Reply to: