[meta-xilinx] IMAGE_FSTYPES default

[Nathan Rossi]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Elvis Dowson [mailto:elvis.dowson at gmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday, November 27, 2014 3:47 AM
> To: Soren Brinkmann
> Cc: Nathan Rossi; meta-xilinx Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [meta-xilinx] IMAGE_FSTYPES default
> 
> Hi Soren,
> 
> > On Nov 26, 2014, at 21:19, Sören Brinkmann <soren.brinkmann at xilinx.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 2014-11-26 at 01:23PM +0400, Elvis Dowson wrote:
> >> Hi Nathan,
> >>
> >>> On Nov 26, 2014, at 11:02, Nathan Rossi <nathan.rossi at xilinx.com>
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> I will be dropping 'ext2' and 'ext2.gz.u-boot' from the default
> IMAGE_FSTYPES in meta-xilinx. If anyone has any objections please respond.
> >>
> >> I still use ramdisks for board bringup and tests. I’m okay with
> dropping it from the default IMAGE_FSTYPES, if you could make an entry in
> the meta-xilinx documentation on the changes required to restore
> generation of the ramdisk image.
> >
> > Overriding the default should be as easy as putting something like this:
> >  IMAGE_FSTYPES += "cpio cpio.gz.u-boot"
> > into your local.conf.
> 
> I’m aware of the over-ride, just suggested that it be documented for
> others.

I intend to fix up the existing docs in meta-xilinx that reference the use of ext2*, so in addition to that I will add some notes how to add custom types.

> 
> > Just out of curiosity, why do you need to use the ext2 initrds instead
> of the
> > cpio initramfs images?
> 
> I’ve never used cpio initramfs images before, I used the ext2 ones just
> because when I was learning how to create a ramdisk, it used ext2 and I
> didn’t bother to check alternate options.
> 
> I think because of this, I missed the whole point of this discussion,
> sorry about that ;-), which was to remove the ext2 versions only, but keep
> the cpio initramfs image generation.

Give ramfs/cpio a try, it can work as a drop in replacement for ramdisks (aka loaded the same way as an initrd/ramdisk) or as an initramfs.

I've found them really useful for testing :). As there is no need to worry about your rootfs getting to large for the ramdisk block ;).

Regards,
Nathan