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

Re: Adding support for ONIE to Debian Live



On Fri, 2018-03-23 at 11:44 +0000, Luca Boccassi wrote:
> On Fri, 2018-03-23 at 08:27 +0800, Steven Shiau wrote:
> > On 3/20/2018 AM 06:14, Luca Boccassi wrote:
> > > I hope this can be useful for others
> > 
> > Yes, exactly! This is great! We recently need this feature and you
> > have 
> > made it and share that. Cool!
> > BTW, did you have the same experience about booting ARM32 ONIE
> > switch? 
> > Some of the switches listed on the ONIE website are ARM32 CPU:
> > http://www.opencompute.org/wiki/Networking/ONIE/HW_Status
> > We submitted a patch to Debian live ARM64 last month, but did not
> > go 
> > further to make that for ARM32.
> > Besides, did you have any experience to boot the Debian live system
> > from 
> > USB of ONIE switch? If so, could you please also share the
> > experience.
> > Thank you very much.
> > 
> > Steven
> 
> Glad it can be helpful :-)
> 
> It was Erik who worked with the hardware, I'll ask him if he can
> comment - I just used the VM as mentioned in the first email to port
> and test.
> 
> We have not done anything with ARM32 so I'm afraid I can't provide
> info
> on that.
> 
> The diffset that was merged has one x86-specific bit when repacking
> the
> initrd (parameters passed to xz), so to use it on ARM you'll probably
> want to detect at build time and parameterise them. Please send a PR
> once you have it working!
> 
> Specifically this line:
> 
> find . | cpio -o -H newc | xz --check=crc32 --x86 --lzma2=dict=512KiB 
> > ${WORKDIR}/initrd.img
> 
> Also you might need to support other compression formats than xz.

Actually I realised that hard-coding those parameters at build time was
wrong, so I went ahead and fixed it myself:

https://salsa.debian.org/live-team/live-build/merge_requests/8

With those changes it should work on other architectures out of the
box!

-- 
Kind regards,
Luca Boccassi

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part


Reply to: