On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 06:47:52PM +0000, Burton, Ross wrote: > On Wed, 27 Feb 2019 at 18:45, Tom Rini <tr...@konsulko.com> wrote: > > OK, so I've kicked things a bit harder again, and here's what I see as > > the (small) rub. > > $ git grep hddimg meta/conf/ > > meta/conf/machine/include/x86-base.inc:IMAGE_FSTYPES ?= "hddimg" > > > > So yes, we can do a test with qemux86/qemux86-64 and documenting this in > > local.conf.sample is good (and a packagegroup that gives more 1:1 > > functionality is on my TODO list somewhere). But it's also true that > > we'll get people with "I can't remove busybox and I tried what it says" > > posts since blindly pulling in hddimg gives at least: > > ERROR: Nothing RPROVIDES 'busybox-mdev' (but > > /home/trini/work/OE/oe-core/meta/recipes-core/initrdscripts/initramfs-framework_1.0.bb > > RDEPENDS on or otherwise requires it) > > > > That's the point I want to make, after throwing out a quick test build > > dir. > > Sure, so the instructions include "don't use hddimg" until we've a way > of not using busybox in the initramfs.
Yes, I think including a comment about making it clear initramfs' still need busybox should be enough of a crumb to help users out. As a separate thread maybe we should talk about dumping initramfs' from the default x86 inc file, but that is indeed separate. -- Tom
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
-- _______________________________________________ yocto mailing list yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
