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

Re: Support for sunxi-based ARM systems in d-i

On Thu, May 01, 2014 at 08:36:52AM +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Wed, 2014-04-30 at 22:26 +0200, Karsten Merker wrote:

> > diff --git a/functions b/functions
> > index 02f7381..3322eb0 100644
> > --- a/functions
> > +++ b/functions
> > @@ -582,13 +582,17 @@ case "$method" in
> >  		fi
> >  		if [ -n "$boot_kernel_path" ]; then
> >  			boot_kernel_path="$boot_mnt_dir/$boot_kernel_path"
> > -			# don't mv the original kernel
> > +			# If we have built a modified version of the kernel
> > +			# (uImage, machine-id prepended, etc.), then move
> > +			# this modified version to its destination and make
> > +			# a backup copy of the previous modified version.
> > +			# Otherwise just copy the original kernel to its
> > +			# destination.
> >  			if [ "$kernel" != "$kfile" ]; then
> >  				backup_and_install "$kernel" \
> >  					"$boot_kernel_path"
> >  			else
> > -				# TODO add support for kernel symlink
> > -				:
> > +				cp -f "$kernel" "$boot_kernel_path"
> Are these symlinks not created automatically by the kernel package?
> I think it would be better to put the actual kernel/initrd path (i.e.
> with the version suffix) directly into the boot.scr rather than creating
> a link to the kernel just to launch it with.
> I'd also like to see boot.scr-$version as the actual file and boot.scr
> as a link to the latest (with f-k creating boot.scr-$version for all
> installed versions). That's probably a separate project though


while I think the changes you have in mind are a worthy goal, I
would like to get basic sunxi support into flash-kernel rather
sooner than later to have it available with the release of d-i
jessie alpha 2.  My patch is in line with the existing behaviour
of flash-kernel, so I would really like to see it integrated now
instead of being deferred until after a (possibly larger) rewrite
of the flash-kernel code base, which is basically unrelated to
adding sunxi support, has happened.

> > The original TODO remarks speak of symlinking, but this would
> > only work if the destination of the link is on the same
> > filesystem as the link itself, as the bootloader could not resolve
> > a cross-filesystem symlink.  This would in particular fail when
> > using a Boot-Device entry to mount a seperate firmware boot
> > partition, so I simply copy the kernel to its target position.
> I think it would be fine to assume that no separate firmware boot
> partition was being used in this mode, at least until such a platform
> turns up (sunxi doesn't want/need it AFAIK).

That is of course a valid design decision, but as it would break
the currently documented/expected behaviour of the Boot-Device
keyword in flash-kernel for a part of the use cases, I'd
personally prefer copying to symlinking.  A compromise could be
to use copying when Boot-Device is defined and to use symlinking
otherwise.  Would that be acceptable to you?

Gem. Par. 28 Abs. 4 Bundesdatenschutzgesetz widerspreche ich der Nutzung
sowie der Weitergabe meiner personenbezogenen Daten für Zwecke der
Werbung sowie der Markt- oder Meinungsforschung.

Reply to: