[Buildroot] [PATCH 5/5 v5] boot/systemd-boot: new package

Yann E. MORIN yann.morin.1998 at free.fr
Wed Dec 26 21:41:00 UTC 2018


Thomas, All,

Adding Peter in the loop; see at the end.

On 2018-12-26 22:23 +0100, Thomas Petazzoni spake thusly:
> On Wed, 26 Dec 2018 09:52:30 +0100, Yann E. MORIN wrote:
> > From: James Hilliard <james.hilliard1 at gmail.com>
> > 
> > systemd-boot is the integration of gummiboot into systemd, and gummiboot
> > is no longer maintained [0]. However, it is still interesting to use it
> > as a simple, stand-alone bootloader.
> > 
> > Since systemd-boot is really part of systemd, when systemd is enabled
> > (as an init system), we rely on it to build the boot blobs, and
> > systemd-boot (this package) is not available.
> > 
> > Now, when systemd is not enabled, systemd-boot (this package) will
> > actually build the boot blobs, and only that. No userspace tool is
> > built.
> > 
> > To avoid duplication, we just symlink the systemd patches as-is. We just
> > need to add a specific patch, that just relaxes the dependency checks,
> > since we're only interested in building the boot blobs.
> > 
> > [0] https://cgit.freedesktop.org/gummiboot/commit/?id=55df1539c9d330732e88bd196afee386db6e4a1d
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: James Hilliard <james.hilliard1 at gmail.com>
> 
> Do we have a serious valid use-case for wanting to use systemd-boot
> without systemd? This adds a fair bit of complexity, so I'd like to be
> sure of what we're doing here.
> 
> An example of the complexity is with the symlinks to the patches. Every
> time a patch is added/removed in package/systemd/, one should remember
> to adjust the symlinks in boot/systemd-boot/. This is something that
> can very easily be missed.

And I now even dropped all of them completely, with the v240 bump, so we
no longer whare any patch with systemd. There is only one patch that is
now needed to build systemd-boot standalone. We still need to investigate
why James was not able to build it, though. James, care to give my series
a new spin, please? (I've repushed the branch just now)

So, the only complexity that remains is the sharing of the boot files
and their install commands.

That, and the little trick to share the source file.

> So it would be good to make sure we have a really solid use-case for
> adding this complexity.

Peter, care to elaborate your position, since you were advocating also
for it, earlier? ;-)

Regards,
Yann E. MORIN.

-- 
.-----------------.--------------------.------------------.--------------------.
|  Yann E. MORIN  | Real-Time Embedded | /"\ ASCII RIBBON | Erics' conspiracy: |
| +33 662 376 056 | Software  Designer | \ / CAMPAIGN     |  ___               |
| +33 223 225 172 `------------.-------:  X  AGAINST      |  \e/  There is no  |
| http://ymorin.is-a-geek.org/ | _/*\_ | / \ HTML MAIL    |   v   conspiracy.  |
'------------------------------^-------^------------------^--------------------'


More information about the buildroot mailing list