<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 5:05 AM, Patrick Ohly <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:patrick.ohly@intel.com" target="_blank">patrick.ohly@intel.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><span class="">On Mon, 2015-08-24 at 13:50 +0200, Patrick Ohly wrote:<br>
> Hello!<br>
><br>
> I just tried to boot a custom image under qemu with<br>
> core-image-minimal-initramfs included in the kernel. For that, I added<br>
> to my local.conf:<br>
><br>
> INITRAMFS_IMAGE = "core-image-minimal-initramfs"<br>
> INITRAMFS_IMAGE_BUNDLE = "1"<br>
><br>
> The extended kernel now gets built fine with the normal "bitbake<br>
> <image>".<br>
<br>
</span>Speaking of qemu and core-image-minimal-initramfs, that initramfs isn't<br>
really suitable as it stands. It uses init-live-boot, which expects to<br>
boot from removable media instead of the fixed disk provided by qemu.<br>
<br>
Is there anything more suitable or do I have to roll my own init script<br>
entirely, perhaps based on initramfs-framework?</blockquote></div><br>Just a note, in meta-mentor we removed initramfs-live-install and initramfs-live-install-efi from core-image-minimal-initramfs and split that off into core-image-minimal-install-initramfs, and set INITRD_IMAGE = "core-image-minimal-install-initramfs" (that's what image-live.bbclass obeys). Not sure if that's ideal, and admittedly haven't done much testing with those images, but I think it makes more sense, name wise, for core-image-minimal-initramfs to be a general image, not something which handles installation.<br>-- <br><div class="gmail_signature">Christopher Larson<br>clarson at kergoth dot com<br>Founder - BitBake, OpenEmbedded, OpenZaurus<br>Maintainer - Tslib<br>Senior Software Engineer, Mentor Graphics</div>
</div></div>