[Buildroot] ISO menu option

vbr vbr vvvg77 at gmail.com
Fri Jul 16 17:42:53 UTC 2010


Thanks for the quick reply. I am using the stable 2010.05. I also checked
out the latest code from git and saw the change you are mentioning but I
haven't tried it yet.

ISO image is a convenient way for us to download and store the image on a
remote server and boot the target system with the remote ISO.

I haven't been able to make it work yet with the ISO image produced by
buildroot. Trying this as a side project, but I will definitely let you know
if I can get it to work. We already have a solution in place, but using
buildroot would be a great improvement over what we have today.

Also, I am trying to keep the config files/software I need outside of
buildroot directory and creating a script to download buildroot and install
my specific config (checked in our own SCM) in there. For example, I need a
more up-to-date version of some Linux drivers and I need to copy my
busybox/kernel/uclibc config files to the right place after unpacking
buildroot. The reason I am doing this is I want to be able to upgrade
buildroot easily when a new stable version is released by just changing the
buildroot version to download in the script and I want to avoid checking
buildroot code in our scm. That would be more painful to upgrade. Are there
guidelines to do that?
Not sure if this is clearly explained.

Thanks
V


On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 1:34 AM, Thomas Petazzoni <
thomas.petazzoni at free-electrons.com> wrote:

> Hello Vince,
>
> On Tue, 6 Jul 2010 10:27:26 -0700
> vbr vbr <vvvg77 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I am new to buildroot. First congratulations for the awesome tool!
>
> Thanks :-)
>
> > I noticed that when I pick the i386 as a target platform, the ISO option
> is
> > present under fs. However, if I pick a different target, say x86_64, the
> ISO
> > menu option disappears. I was wondering what the reason was behind this
> as I
> > am trying to build an ISO image for x86_64.
>
> Which version of Buildroot are you using ?
>
> In Buildroot 2010.05, it's correct that the ISO9660 option was only
> available for the i386 architecture. In the current git of Buildroot,
> we've fixed this, and it is now possible to enable the generation of
> ISO9660 filesystem image for both i386 and x64_64 (see
> commit c7ee5853a0d54a32aa69a4e4065e6ecdd63c4a4c).
>
> BTW, I would be interested by your feedback on the ISO images Buildroot
> generates. I've reworked the code that does this, but as I don't use
> these myself, I don't know what kind of use cases ISO images are
> supposed to solve. Therefore, your feedback on whether the ISO images
> generated by Buildroot are useful or incomplete would be very
> interesting.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Thomas
> --
> Thomas Petazzoni, Free Electrons
> Kernel, drivers, real-time and embedded Linux
> development, consulting, training and support.
> http://free-electrons.com
> _______________________________________________
> buildroot mailing list
> buildroot at busybox.net
> http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/buildroot
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.busybox.net/pipermail/buildroot/attachments/20100716/126f89e7/attachment-0002.html>


More information about the buildroot mailing list