initramfs compression and some other questions
Hi,
I've been using buildroot for a small (i586) Linux recovery image, having both the kernel and initramfs root in a single image.
By default, buildroot (linux/linux.mk) sets GZIP compression for initramfs, and there's no option to choose other compression mode.
My question is why is GZIP compression forced for initramfs? IMHO, initramfs compression doesn't make much sense, since the kernel is compressed altogether with initramfs, and we have double compression, that adds more size to the resulting image and time overhead when unpacking.
Why not remove the following lines from linux.mk?
$(call KCONFIG_DISABLE_OPT,CONFIG_INITRAMFS_COMPRESSION_NONE,$(@D)/.config) $(call KCONFIG_ENABLE_OPT,CONFIG_INITRAMFS_COMPRESSION_GZIP,$(@D)/.config))
Or probably use KCONFIG_ENABLE_OPT,CONFIG_INITRAMFS_COMPRESSION_NONE instead?
Besides, there are other compression methods supported by linux kernel, so why force GZIP?
BTW, I have submitted a number of patches to the list, that attempt to fix some of the issues I've encountered while building my recovery image. Is it the right place to share patches or do I need to use bugz and file a bug for each change?
I have some more changes that I'd like to share.
It's been no ack/nack for the stuff I sent last week. So I'm kind of wondering whether this stuff is needed upstream.
And the last question is about adding new packages to buildroot. For example, do you plan to add a pdf viewer?
I've added epdfview, it seems to work fine. Is there any reason to not include it in the mainstream buildroot?
I've also added tigervnc for my small recovery image.
Seems to work fine as well.
Do you plan to include it as well or is it considered unneeded for the majority of the buildroot users?
Thanks,
Val.
Quoted 13 lines · Valentine Barshak
Hi,
I've been using buildroot for a small (i586) Linux recovery image, having both the kernel and initramfs root in a single image.By default, buildroot (
linux/linux.mk) sets GZIP compression for initramfs, and there's no option to choose other compression mode.My question is why is GZIP compression forced for initramfs? IMHO, initramfs compression doesn't make much sense, since the kernel is compressed altogether with initramfs, and we have double compression, that adds more size to the resulting image and time overhead when unpacking.
Quoted 8 lines
Why not remove the following lines from linux.mk?
$(call KCONFIG_DISABLE_OPT,CONFIG_INITRAMFS_COMPRESSION_NONE,$(@D)/.config) $(call KCONFIG_ENABLE_OPT,CONFIG_INITRAMFS_COMPRESSION_GZIP,$(@D)/.config))Or probably use KCONFIG_ENABLE_OPT,CONFIG_INITRAMFS_COMPRESSION_NONE instead?
Besides, there are other compression methods supported by linux kernel, so why force GZIP?
Good idea. Care to make a patch?
Quoted 3 lines
BTW, I have submitted a number of patches to the list, that attempt
to fix some of the issues I've encountered while building my recovery image. Is it the right place to share patches or do I need to use bugz and file a bug for each change?
It's the right place. We don't use bugzilla that much - basically only for
bugs that aren't resolved (yet).
Quoted 2 lines
I have some more changes that I'd like to share.
It's been no ack/nack for the stuff I sent last week. So I'm kind of wondering whether this stuff is needed upstream.
It just takes a while before patches get committed. As long as you react
to the comments you get (like you did), they should be included in the long run. But it can take months...
Quoted 9 lines
And the last question is about adding new packages to buildroot. For example, do you plan to add a pdf viewer?
I've added epdfview, it seems to work fine. Is there any reason to not include it in the mainstream buildroot?
I've also added tigervnc for my small recovery image.
Seems to work fine as well.
Do you plan to include it as well or is it considered unneeded for the majority of the buildroot users?
Well, firefox is on the way in, so a pdf viewer shouldn't be a problem :-)
Regards,
Arnout
Signature · 6 lines
Arnout Vandecappelle arnout at mind be Senior Embedded Software Architect +32-16-286540 Essensium/Mind http://www.mind.be G.Geenslaan 9, 3001 Leuven, Belgium BE 872 984 063 RPR Leuven LinkedIn profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/arnoutvandecappelle GPG fingerprint: 7CB5 E4CC 6C2E EFD4 6E3D A754 F963 ECAB 2450 2F1F
Quoted 22 lines · Arnout Vandecappelle
Quoted 21 lines · Valentine Barshak
Hi,
I've been using buildroot for a small (i586) Linux recovery image, having both the kernel and initramfs root in a single image.By default, buildroot (
linux/linux.mk) sets GZIP compression for initramfs, and there's no option to choose other compression mode.My question is why is GZIP compression forced for initramfs? IMHO, initramfs compression doesn't make much sense, since the kernel is compressed altogether with initramfs, and we have double compression, that adds more size to the resulting image and time overhead when unpacking.
Why not remove the following lines from linux.mk?
$(call KCONFIG_DISABLE_OPT,CONFIG_INITRAMFS_COMPRESSION_NONE,$(@D)/.config) $(call KCONFIG_ENABLE_OPT,CONFIG_INITRAMFS_COMPRESSION_GZIP,$(@D)/.config))
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 5 lines
Or probably use KCONFIG_ENABLE_OPT,CONFIG_INITRAMFS_COMPRESSION_NONE instead?
Besides, there are other compression methods supported by linux kernel, so why force GZIP?
Good idea. Care to make a patch?
I'll try to play with it a bit more and maybe eventually come up with a patch.
Quoted 11 lines
Quoted 5 lines
BTW, I have submitted a number of patches to the list, that attempt to fix some of the issues I've encountered while building my recovery image. Is it the right place to share patches or
do I need to use bugz and file a bug for each change?It's the right place. We don't use bugzilla that much - basically
only for
bugs that aren't resolved (yet).
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 3 lines
I have some more changes that I'd like to share.
It's been no ack/nack for the stuff I sent last week. So I'm kind of wondering whether this stuff is needed upstream.It just takes a while before patches get committed. As long as you react
to the comments you get (like you did), they should be included in the long run. But it can take months...
Really hope it's gonna be faster than that. It's hard to keep track of things for months.
BTW, some of the patches have got in already, thanks to Peter.
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 7 lines
And the last question is about adding new packages to buildroot. For example, do you plan to add a pdf viewer?
I've added epdfview, it seems to work fine. Is there any reason to not include it in the mainstream buildroot?
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 4 lines
I've also added tigervnc for my small recovery image.
Seems to work fine as well.
Do you plan to include it as well or is it considered unneeded for the majority of the buildroot users?Well, firefox is on the way in, so a pdf viewer shouldn't be a problem
:-)
hehe, OK, I'll prolly prepare some more patches if I have time.
Thanks Arnout.
Quoted 4 lines
Regards,
Arnout
Regards,
Val.