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

Re: Changing flash-kernel behaviour (Was: Support for sunxi-based ARM systems in d-i)

On Thu, May 01, 2014 at 04:28:55PM +0200, Karsten Merker wrote:
> Do all platforms flash-kernel cares for have their boot scripts
> on a filesystem that supports symlinks?  I know too little about
> the various ARM systems in this regard, but if there are systems
> among them that for example boot from a FAT partition, this would
> mean they would no longer be able to boot.  From looking at
> bootscr.omap in the flash kernel sources I would assume that this
> is at least the case for the Pandaboard.

A lot of them use a vfat partition, so symlinks are not an option.

> That would indeed be nice, but it would come with a price. Would
> we be willing to drop support for an existing (although not
> officially Debian-supported) platform to achieve this?  Copying
> instead of symlinking could of course be an alternative option -
> not particularly elegant but not dependent on filesystem
> features.
> > BTW, the u-boot guys seem to want to converg on using either the
> > extlinux config file format or the BootloaderSpec[0] as the standard
> > mechanism for configuring which kernel to use. THe former would probably
> > be easier to support (since we could just refactor update-extlinux out
> > of the existing x86 only package).
> > [0] http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Specifications/BootLoaderSpec/
> Hm, this spec mandates that the /boot partiton must be FAT.
> When looking at the discussion about Raspbian using FAT on /boot
> I doubt that Debian would implement that spec.

I sure hope not.  That's a terrible spec.  Many systems already use
symlinks in /boot and you can't just arbitrarily decide that isn't
allowed.  Why not just declare /boot/loader should be on FAT, but leave
/boot out of it.

Len Sorensen

Reply to: