kernel.bbclass: Allow modules.tar.gz generation to be inhibited
PATCH 1/1 kernel.bbclass: Allow modules.tar.gz generation to be inhibited
The modules.tar.gz archive is sometimes of no value and it can take a noticeable time to build if many modules were enabled in the kernel configuration. The extraneous file also contributes to deploy/ clutter and is a waste of disk space.
Allow it to be suppressed by setting KERNEL_DEPLOY_MODULE_TARBALL=0.
--- meta/classes/kernel.bbclass | 4 +++- 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
meta/classes/kernel.bbclass +3 -1
@@ -520,9 +520,11 @@ do_uboot_mkimage() { addtask uboot_mkimage before do_install after do_compile +KERNEL_DEPLOY_MODULE_TARBALL ?= "1" + kernel_do_deploy() { install -m 0644 ${KERNEL_OUTPUT} ${DEPLOYDIR}/${KERNEL_IMAGE_BASE_NAME}.bin - if (grep -q -i -e '^CONFIG_MODULES=y$' .config); then + if [ ${KERNEL_DEPLOY_MODULE_TARBALL} = "1" ] && (grep -q -i -e '^CONFIG_MODULES=y$' .config); then tar -cvzf ${DEPLOYDIR}/modules-${KERNEL_VERSION}-${PR}-${MACHINE}.tgz -C ${D} lib fi
Signature · 1 line
1.7.9
Quoted 6 lines · On Sunday 23 September 2012 22:45:10 Phil Blundell wrote:
The modules.tar.gz archive is sometimes of no value and it can take a noticeable time to build if many modules were enabled in the kernel configuration. The extraneous file also contributes to deploy/ clutter and is a waste of disk space.
Allow it to be suppressed by setting KERNEL_DEPLOY_MODULE_TARBALL=0.
I'm wondering, does anyone still find this file useful?
Cheers,
Paul
Signature · 2 lines
Paul Eggleton Intel Open Source Technology Centre
Quoted 9 lines · Paul Eggleton
Quoted 6 lines · On Sunday 23 September 2012 22:45:10 Phil Blundell wrote:
The modules.tar.gz archive is sometimes of no value and it can take a noticeable time to build if many modules were enabled in the kernel configuration. The extraneous file also contributes to deploy/ clutter and is a waste of disk space.
Allow it to be suppressed by setting KERNEL_DEPLOY_MODULE_TARBALL=0.
I'm wondering, does anyone still find this file useful?
I've used it to put modules in rootfs when there is a new kernel version and I do not have easy access to packages feeds. This speeds testing.
Philip
Quoted 6 lines · Philip Balister
Quoted 3 lines
Quoted 1 line
Allow it to be suppressed by setting KERNEL_DEPLOY_MODULE_TARBALL=0.
I'm wondering, does anyone still find this file useful?
I've used it to put modules in rootfs when there is a new kernel version and I do not have easy access to packages feeds. This speeds testing.
Sounds like a less than common use-case. How about setting it to 0 by default?
Ross
Quoted 9 lines · Ross
Quoted 6 lines · Philip Balister
Quoted 3 lines
Quoted 1 line
Allow it to be suppressed by setting KERNEL_DEPLOY_MODULE_TARBALL=0.
I'm wondering, does anyone still find this file useful?
I've used it to put modules in rootfs when there is a new kernel version and I do not have easy access to packages feeds. This speeds testing.
Sounds like a less than common use-case. How about setting it to 0 by default?
I know I used to use this file a lot when working on Zaurus kernels. These days I don't get to play with hardware as much as I'd like so I've not used it in a while.
It is extremely useful when you need it. I've always argued there are much more problematic time sinks in the build than this tarball creation...
Cheers,
Richard
Quoted 9 lines · Ross
Quoted 6 lines · Philip Balister
Quoted 3 lines
Quoted 1 line
Allow it to be suppressed by setting KERNEL_DEPLOY_MODULE_TARBALL=0.
I'm wondering, does anyone still find this file useful?
I've used it to put modules in rootfs when there is a new kernel version and I do not have easy access to packages feeds. This speeds testing.
Sounds like a less than common use-case. How about setting it to 0 by default?
Fine with me.Expect me to be annoying on irc when I forget how to turn it back on :)
Philip