On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 3:14 PM, Robert P. J. Day <rpj...@crashcourse.ca> wrote:
>
> just noticed the following -- here's snippets from kernel.bbclass:
>
> ... snip ...
> INITRAMFS_TASK ?= ""
> ... snip ...
> # NOTE: setting INITRAMFS_TASK is for backward compatibility
> # The preferred method is to set INITRAMFS_IMAGE, because
> # this INITRAMFS_TASK has circular dependency problems
> # if the initramfs requires kernel modules
> image_task = d.getVar('INITRAMFS_TASK', True)
> if image_task:
> d.appendVarFlag('do_configure', 'depends', ' ${INITRAMFS_TASK}')
> ... snip ...
> if [ "$use_alternate_initrd" = "" ] && [ "${INITRAMFS_TASK}" != "" ]
> ; then
> # The old style way of copying an prebuilt image and building
> it
> # is turned on via INTIRAMFS_TASK != ""
> ... snip ...
>
> i have about a dozen layers checked out and the only other place i
> see that variable used is:
>
> meta-oe/meta-initramfs/recipes-kernel/linux/linux-yocto-tiny-kexecboot_3.10.bb:
> INITRAMFS_TASK = "${INITRAMFS_IMAGE}:do_rootfs"
check meta-handheld, it was an existing use case we didn't want to break.
Bruce
>
> so has INITRAMFS_TASK been obsoleted by INITRAMFS_IMAGE? or is it
> still worth hanging onto?
>
> rday
>
> --
>
> ========================================================================
> Robert P. J. Day Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA
> http://crashcourse.ca
>
> Twitter: http://twitter.com/rpjday
> LinkedIn: http://ca.linkedin.com/in/rpjday
> ========================================================================
>
> --
> _______________________________________________
> Openembedded-core mailing list
> Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
> http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
--
"Thou shalt not follow the NULL pointer, for chaos and madness await
thee at its end"
--
_______________________________________________
Openembedded-core mailing list
Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
