| Message ID | 1391549148-31993-1-git-send-email-martin@barkynet.com |
|---|---|
| State | Rejected |
| Headers | show |
On 04/02/14 22:25, Martin Bark wrote: > This patch adds a variable BR2_TARGET_ROOTFS_ISO9660_OVERLAY that > is similar to BR2_ROOTFS_OVERLAY except the files are placed in the > iso9660 file system. > > Signed-off-by: Martin Bark <martin@barkynet.com> Acked-by: Arnout Vandecappelle (Essensium/Mind) <arnout@mind.be> I haven't tried it but it looks obviously-correct. Jean Sergemoel has a patch in the queue that does a similar thing (in addition to a few more changes). Jean, could you rebase your patches on top of this one? And, if possible, also test if this one works for you. If yes, add your Tested-by to this patch. Regards, Arnout > --- > fs/iso9660/Config.in | 16 +++++++++++++++- > fs/iso9660/iso9660.mk | 7 +++++++ > 2 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/fs/iso9660/Config.in b/fs/iso9660/Config.in > index 50b4377..f429b4f 100644 > --- a/fs/iso9660/Config.in > +++ b/fs/iso9660/Config.in > @@ -8,11 +8,25 @@ config BR2_TARGET_ROOTFS_ISO9660 > help > Build a bootable iso9660 image > > +if BR2_TARGET_ROOTFS_ISO9660 > + > config BR2_TARGET_ROOTFS_ISO9660_BOOT_MENU > string "Boot menu.lst file" > - depends on BR2_TARGET_ROOTFS_ISO9660 > default "fs/iso9660/menu.lst" > > +config BR2_TARGET_ROOTFS_ISO9660_OVERLAY > + string "iso9660 filesystem overlay directories" > + default "" > + help > + Specify a list of directories that are copied over the root of the > + iso filesystem after the build has finished and before it is > + packed into the iso filesystem image. > + > + They are copied as-is into the iso image, excluding files ending > + with ~ and .git, .svn and .hg directories. > + > +endif > + > comment "iso image needs a Linux kernel to be built" > depends on BR2_i386 || BR2_x86_64 > depends on !BR2_LINUX_KERNEL > diff --git a/fs/iso9660/iso9660.mk b/fs/iso9660/iso9660.mk > index a6a9c95..1d0e5e0 100644 > --- a/fs/iso9660/iso9660.mk > +++ b/fs/iso9660/iso9660.mk > @@ -27,6 +27,13 @@ ifeq ($(BR2_TARGET_ROOTFS_INITRAMFS),y) > else > cp $(BINARIES_DIR)/rootfs.cpio$(ROOTFS_CPIO_COMPRESS_EXT) $(ISO9660_TARGET_DIR)/initrd > endif > + > + @$(foreach d, $(call qstrip,$(BR2_TARGET_ROOTFS_ISO9660_OVERLAY)), \ > + $(call MESSAGE,"Copying iso9660 overlay $(d)"); \ > + rsync -a --ignore-times $(RSYNC_VCS_EXCLUSIONS) \ > + --chmod=Du+w --exclude .empty --exclude '*~' \ > + $(d)/ $(ISO9660_TARGET_DIR)$(sep)) > + > # Use fakeroot to pretend all target binaries are owned by root > rm -f $(FAKEROOT_SCRIPT) > echo "chown -R 0:0 $(ISO9660_TARGET_DIR)" >> $(FAKEROOT_SCRIPT) >
On Mon, 17 Feb 2014 08:06:17 +0100 Arnout Vandecappelle <arnout@mind.be> wrote: > On 04/02/14 22:25, Martin Bark wrote: > > This patch adds a variable BR2_TARGET_ROOTFS_ISO9660_OVERLAY that > > is similar to BR2_ROOTFS_OVERLAY except the files are placed in the > > iso9660 file system. > > > Since Buildroot only builds root filesystems for the target device, it would probably be safe to drop the "TARGET_" distinction from that variable name. Mike > > Signed-off-by: Martin Bark <martin@barkynet.com> > > Acked-by: Arnout Vandecappelle (Essensium/Mind) <arnout@mind.be> > > I haven't tried it but it looks obviously-correct.
On 17/02/14 12:42, Mike Zick wrote: > On Mon, 17 Feb 2014 08:06:17 +0100 > Arnout Vandecappelle <arnout@mind.be> wrote: > >> On 04/02/14 22:25, Martin Bark wrote: >>> This patch adds a variable BR2_TARGET_ROOTFS_ISO9660_OVERLAY that >>> is similar to BR2_ROOTFS_OVERLAY except the files are placed in the >>> iso9660 file system. >>> >> > > Since Buildroot only builds root filesystems for the target device, > it would probably be safe to drop the "TARGET_" distinction from > that variable name. Agreed, but that should not be done in this patch. All the rootfs stuff is currently using the BR2_TARGET_ROOTFS_ prefix, so this patch should stick with that convention. Regards, Arnout > > Mike > >>> Signed-off-by: Martin Bark <martin@barkynet.com> >> >> Acked-by: Arnout Vandecappelle (Essensium/Mind) <arnout@mind.be> >> >> I haven't tried it but it looks obviously-correct. > > >
On 17/02/14 07:06, Arnout Vandecappelle wrote: > On 04/02/14 22:25, Martin Bark wrote: >> This patch adds a variable BR2_TARGET_ROOTFS_ISO9660_OVERLAY that >> is similar to BR2_ROOTFS_OVERLAY except the files are placed in the >> iso9660 file system. >> >> Signed-off-by: Martin Bark <martin@barkynet.com> > > Acked-by: Arnout Vandecappelle (Essensium/Mind) <arnout@mind.be> > > I haven't tried it but it looks obviously-correct. > > Jean Sergemoel has a patch in the queue that does a similar thing (in > addition to a few more changes). Jean, could you rebase your patches on > top of this one? And, if possible, also test if this one works for you. > If yes, add your Tested-by to this patch. Arnout, Thanks for the review. Yes by some strange coincidence both Jean and myself sent patches for the iso9660 file system on the same day. I agree it would be best to rebase Jeans patches. Jean, Let me know if you want any assistance on producing an updated patch set. Thanks
> > On 17/02/14 07:06, Arnout Vandecappelle wrote: >> On 04/02/14 22:25, Martin Bark wrote: >>> This patch adds a variable BR2_TARGET_ROOTFS_ISO9660_OVERLAY that >>> is similar to BR2_ROOTFS_OVERLAY except the files are placed in the >>> iso9660 file system. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Martin Bark <martin@barkynet.com> >> >> Acked-by: Arnout Vandecappelle (Essensium/Mind) <arnout@mind.be> >> >> I haven't tried it but it looks obviously-correct. >> >> Jean Sergemoel has a patch in the queue that does a similar thing (in >> addition to a few more changes). Jean, could you rebase your patches on >> top of this one? And, if possible, also test if this one works for you. >> If yes, add your Tested-by to this patch. > > Arnout, > > Thanks for the review. Yes by some strange coincidence both Jean and > myself sent patches for the iso9660 file system on the same day. I > agree it would be best to rebase Jeans patches. > > > Jean, > > Let me know if you want any assistance on producing an updated patch set. > > Thanks > Hi All, Ok, I will include that in my patch. Regards, Jean
>> >> On 17/02/14 07:06, Arnout Vandecappelle wrote: >>> On 04/02/14 22:25, Martin Bark wrote: >>>> This patch adds a variable BR2_TARGET_ROOTFS_ISO9660_OVERLAY that >>>> is similar to BR2_ROOTFS_OVERLAY except the files are placed in the >>>> iso9660 file system. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Martin Bark <martin@barkynet.com> >>> >>> Acked-by: Arnout Vandecappelle (Essensium/Mind) <arnout@mind.be> >>> >>> I haven't tried it but it looks obviously-correct. >>> >>> Jean Sergemoel has a patch in the queue that does a similar thing (in >>> addition to a few more changes). Jean, could you rebase your patches on >>> top of this one? And, if possible, also test if this one works for you. >>> If yes, add your Tested-by to this patch. >> >> Arnout, >> >> Thanks for the review. Yes by some strange coincidence both Jean and >> myself sent patches for the iso9660 file system on the same day. I >> agree it would be best to rebase Jeans patches. >> >> >> Jean, >> >> Let me know if you want any assistance on producing an updated patch >> set. >> >> Thanks >> > > Hi All, > > Ok, I will include that in my patch. > > Regards, > Jean Hi All, I will send new patch to include your remark. I use my real name (Jerome Sagnole) :) Arnout, for your remark on default (option BR2_TARGET_ROOTFS_ISO9660_ROCK_RIDGE) I keep this default for compatibility because this option is activate in old code. If you want I can suppress that. Regards, Jerome
diff --git a/fs/iso9660/Config.in b/fs/iso9660/Config.in index 50b4377..f429b4f 100644 --- a/fs/iso9660/Config.in +++ b/fs/iso9660/Config.in @@ -8,11 +8,25 @@ config BR2_TARGET_ROOTFS_ISO9660 help Build a bootable iso9660 image +if BR2_TARGET_ROOTFS_ISO9660 + config BR2_TARGET_ROOTFS_ISO9660_BOOT_MENU string "Boot menu.lst file" - depends on BR2_TARGET_ROOTFS_ISO9660 default "fs/iso9660/menu.lst" +config BR2_TARGET_ROOTFS_ISO9660_OVERLAY + string "iso9660 filesystem overlay directories" + default "" + help + Specify a list of directories that are copied over the root of the + iso filesystem after the build has finished and before it is + packed into the iso filesystem image. + + They are copied as-is into the iso image, excluding files ending + with ~ and .git, .svn and .hg directories. + +endif + comment "iso image needs a Linux kernel to be built" depends on BR2_i386 || BR2_x86_64 depends on !BR2_LINUX_KERNEL diff --git a/fs/iso9660/iso9660.mk b/fs/iso9660/iso9660.mk index a6a9c95..1d0e5e0 100644 --- a/fs/iso9660/iso9660.mk +++ b/fs/iso9660/iso9660.mk @@ -27,6 +27,13 @@ ifeq ($(BR2_TARGET_ROOTFS_INITRAMFS),y) else cp $(BINARIES_DIR)/rootfs.cpio$(ROOTFS_CPIO_COMPRESS_EXT) $(ISO9660_TARGET_DIR)/initrd endif + + @$(foreach d, $(call qstrip,$(BR2_TARGET_ROOTFS_ISO9660_OVERLAY)), \ + $(call MESSAGE,"Copying iso9660 overlay $(d)"); \ + rsync -a --ignore-times $(RSYNC_VCS_EXCLUSIONS) \ + --chmod=Du+w --exclude .empty --exclude '*~' \ + $(d)/ $(ISO9660_TARGET_DIR)$(sep)) + # Use fakeroot to pretend all target binaries are owned by root rm -f $(FAKEROOT_SCRIPT) echo "chown -R 0:0 $(ISO9660_TARGET_DIR)" >> $(FAKEROOT_SCRIPT)
This patch adds a variable BR2_TARGET_ROOTFS_ISO9660_OVERLAY that is similar to BR2_ROOTFS_OVERLAY except the files are placed in the iso9660 file system. Signed-off-by: Martin Bark <martin@barkynet.com> --- fs/iso9660/Config.in | 16 +++++++++++++++- fs/iso9660/iso9660.mk | 7 +++++++ 2 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)