Andy Green andy at openmoko.com
Sat Jan 31 21:03:35 CET 2009

Hash: SHA1

Somebody in the thread at some point said:
| 2009/1/31 Andy Green <andy at openmoko.com>:
|> So need to remove what you have in partition 1, and add a kernel named
|> /boot/uImage-GTA02.bin into partition 2 (since that's your rootfs),
|> which should be ext2 or better ext3.
| Thanks. The Debian installer had put the kernel in the root of
| /dev/mmcblk0p1, not in a boot subdirectory. I added a boot
| subdirectory with symlinks to the kernel and now it's all working.
| Why is the journalling of ext3 better? Would the kernel also be better

Ext3 is better IMO because it can soak up a lot of casual damage that
ext2 can't.  With my usage pattern I am randomly powering things off all
the time I appreciate how ext3 never makes any difficulty for me about
that.  Whereas after a day of it ext2 is on its knees.

| off in an ext3 fs?

Splitting the kernel off in its own private partition is an aberration
we introduced because ext2 parser in U-Boot was broken for a while.  So
we had to make do with a VFAT partition first that U-Boot could parse,
then an ext2 one after that contained the rootfs.

But it makes trouble for updating the kernel in the case you have
multiple rootfs, and makes it possible to get your kernel and modules
out of sync.  It's an ugly kludge.

So the optimum situation is that the kernel is coming out of the same
filesystem that is the root filesystem, the package update for it is
simply to put in it /boot on current root filesystem which is easiest
for the package system.

It also readily allows different kernels in different rootfs if you are
making an SD with multiple rootfs.

- -Andy
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org


More information about the support mailing list