gta02, 2007.2: state of upgrades
marek at openmoko.com
Sat Aug 2 21:02:15 CEST 2008
On Saturday, 2. August 2008 22:24:19 Andy Green wrote:
> Packaging issues are out of my scope, or control.
May be but we still should consider this, right ?
> If nobody decided to add REQUIRES to the kernel package for the
> previously monolithic Ethernet over USB modules, then we end up like
We can have all available REQUIRED fields activated but that wont help if the
user just upgrades the kernel via dfu-util ...
> I issued an RFC about it on the kernel list before it was done,
> so this isn't some switch I threw in the dark while snickering.
Nobody assumed the opposite.
> Why does our packaging fragment the module binaries into a zillion
> individual packages anyway and allow this issue? Why are the modules,
> intimately tied to the monolithic kernel of the same version, not in the
> same package to guarantee consistency? We have the space and it will be
> a rare customer who micromanages his package set to the extent of adding
> and removing module packages.
AFAIK we can't solve this by packaging (at the moment). The kernel and rootfs
live in different partitions and thus can be updated independently.
In general I like your idea but we have to look at what we have now. I think
we both agree that our current packaging is inherently broken. I would prefer
to wait with those changes until we can update the kernel and the rootfs at
the same time.
PS: I never tried to SSH in a Mass Storage device. ;-)
More information about the support