On Fri, Mar 21, 2025 at 07:38:27PM +0100, Simon Glass wrote: > Hi Tom, > > On Thu, 20 Mar 2025 at 15:22, Tom Rini <tr...@konsulko.com> wrote: > > > > On Thu, Mar 20, 2025 at 03:43:36AM +0000, Simon Glass wrote: > > > Hi Tom, > > > > > > On Wed, 19 Mar 2025 at 16:40, Tom Rini <tr...@konsulko.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 19, 2025 at 03:03:49PM +0000, Simon Glass wrote: > > > > > Hi Tom, > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, 18 Mar 2025 at 16:53, Tom Rini <tr...@konsulko.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 18, 2025 at 03:24:02PM +0000, Simon Glass wrote: > > > > > > > Hi Tom, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, 18 Mar 2025 at 15:04, Tom Rini <tr...@konsulko.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, Mar 15, 2025 at 02:25:58PM +0000, Simon Glass wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Any 'bootable' flag in a DOS partition causes boostd to only > > > > > > > > > scan > > > > > > > > > bootable partitions for that media. This can mean that > > > > > > > > > extlinux.conf > > > > > > > > > files on the root disk are missed. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Put this logic behind a flag and update the documentation. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > For now, the flag is enabled, to preserve existing behaviour. > > > > > > > > > Future > > > > > > > > > work may provide a command (or some other mechanism) to > > > > > > > > > control this. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Isn't this backwards as the existing behavior (prior to > > > > > > > > bootstd) was to > > > > > > > > scan and use these files, and so that's the behavior we need to > > > > > > > > preserve > > > > > > > > by default. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Not so far as I know, but I've already spent too much time trying > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > decode those scripts. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If you look at scan_dev_for_boot_part, that is what I was trying > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > replicate with bootstd. > > > > > > > > > > > > The feedback from the community call where this was brought up was > > > > > > that > > > > > > it used to work and now didn't, I thought. Heinrich, I think you > > > > > > had one > > > > > > of the cases here (something about RISC-V and multiple distros?) or > > > > > > am I > > > > > > misremembering? > > > > > > > > > > OK let's see if Heinrich chimes in. > > > > > > > > > > Are there notes for the call? It would help me if they could all be in > > > > > a shared document, like we used to use[1]. > > > > > > > > Yes, they're in email. > > > > > > What subject should I search for to find them? I looked for 'community > > > call' and a few other things, but cannot find them. > > > > They're in reply to every announcement email and sent to all three > > lists. > > OK, well I can't find them, sorry. I did see the first one you sent > but after that I have no record. > > It sounds like you don't want them in a doc for easy reference?
I don't want them hidden away in some document, I want them easily accessible. https://lore.kernel.org/u-boot/20250128171923.GQ1233568@bill-the-cat/ https://lore.kernel.org/u-boot/20250211204927.GF1233568@bill-the-cat/ https://lore.kernel.org/u-boot/20250225191031.GS1233568@bill-the-cat/ https://lore.kernel.org/u-boot/20250311203117.GV2640854@bill-the-cat/ All of which are in reply to the announcement email for the release. -- Tom
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
