[Arm-dev] FW: Centos specific patch for uboot images
Pablo Sebastián Greco
pablo at fliagreco.com.ar
Fri Sep 20 15:09:34 UTC 2019
El 20/9/19 a las 11:58, Mark Verlinde escribió:
> If we can agree in principle of this:
>
> https://github.com/markVnl/rpms-uboot-tools/compare/master...centosisms
Yeap, that is what I had in mind, thanks!!!
>
> If will see what I can do.
>
> Grtz Mark
>
> (Sorry Pablo, accidentally answered to you instead to the list)
Yeap, that happens to me all the time :)
Pablo.
>
>> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
>> Afzender: Pablo Sebastián Greco<pablo at fliagreco.com.ar>
>> Verstuurd: Vrijdag 20 September 2019 15:14
>> Aan: Conversations around CentOS on ARM hardware <arm-dev at centos.org>; Mark Verlinde <mark at havak.nl>
>> Onderwerp: Re: [Arm-dev] Centos specific patch for uboot images
>>
>> Mark,
>> you're absolutely right, and I have a local copy of that same
>> idea.
>>
>> WRT your patches, I have some nitpicks. I think the generated
>> srpm should be the same in both CentOS and Fedora, which could
>> be solved by including "the other one" as a source
>>
>> If you'd like take on the task of getting this upstreamed to
>> Fedora, you'd be helping me "a lot", if not, just know that it
>> is in my to-do list :-)
>>
>> Pablo.
>>
>> El 20/9/19 a las 09:46, Mark Verlinde
>> escribió:
>>
>> First of all congratulations and thanks for the latest 7.7 release; updated several systems without issues!
>>
>> As mentioned in an other conversation it is the logical continuation of 7.6-updates nevertheless found some nice surprises in the armhfp and especially aarch64 extras repository's including updated u-boot images
>>
>> This being said it saddens me to see in the source file of the uboot-tools-2019.07-3 they still carry a Fedora specific patch. While it is not a difficult fix the get centosisms in. Especially since the upstream maintainer (intentionally?) reverted the order of first two distro specific patches. (This makes a clean patch possible without patching the patch.)
>>
>> I know it is not a encouraged to boot aarch64 on our SBC's, nor is it my objective to promote this.
>> But an easy route I use for over an year is though uboot-uefi boot > grub2.
>> And have to say I like it a lot, with an (serial)monitor attracted you can choose the kernel in grub2;
>> or partion you want to boot (if you happen to feel to be inclined to have a multiboot-environment)
>>
>> after re-basing to uboot-tools-2019.07-3
>> ( https://github.com/markVnl/rpms-uboot-tools/compare/centos...el7 <https://github.com/markVnl/rpms-uboot-tools/compare/centos...el7> )
>> these two patches do the job for me:
>>
>> >From 98a2c15275a5fe154cf80344b7538d72ecb00645 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>> From: Mark Verlinde <mark at havak.nl> <mailto:mark at havak.nl>
>> Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2019 13:29:10 +0200
>> Subject: [PATCH 1/2] uefi use Centos specific path name
>>
>> ---
>> uefi-use-Centos-specific-path-name.patch | 50 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> 1 file changed, 50 insertions(+)
>> create mode 100644 uefi-use-Centos-specific-path-name.patch
>>
>> diff --git a/uefi-use-Centos-specific-path-name.patch b/uefi-use-Centos-specific-path-name.patch
>> new file mode 100644
>> index 0000000..14abac1
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/uefi-use-Centos-specific-path-name.patch
>> @@ -0,0 +1,50 @@
>> +From dd6a7a9726e5d79bb053d3ab0a8b0ae273140bce Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>> +From: Mark Verlinde <mark at havak.nl> <mailto:mark at havak.nl>
>> +Date: Tue, 25 Dec 2018 15:28:56 +0100
>> +Subject: [PATCH 1/1] uefi use Centos specific path name
>> +
>> +Signed-off-by: Mark Verlinde <mark at havak.nl> <mailto:mark at havak.nl>
>> +---
>> + include/config_distro_bootcmd.h | 10 +++++-----
>> + 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>> +
>> +diff --git a/include/config_distro_bootcmd.h b/include/config_distro_bootcmd.h
>> +index 47e98e14ac..aa4b24d4de 100644
>> +--- a/include/config_distro_bootcmd.h
>> ++++ b/include/config_distro_bootcmd.h
>> +@@ -92,9 +92,9 @@
>> +
>> + #ifdef CONFIG_EFI_LOADER
>> + #if defined(CONFIG_ARM64)
>> +-#define BOOTEFI_NAME "bootaa64.efi"
>> ++#define BOOTEFI_NAME "grubaa64.efi"
>> + #elif defined(CONFIG_ARM)
>> +-#define BOOTEFI_NAME "bootarm.efi"
>> ++#define BOOTEFI_NAME "grubarm.efi"
>> + #elif defined(CONFIG_X86_RUN_32BIT)
>> + #define BOOTEFI_NAME "bootia32.efi"
>> + #elif defined(CONFIG_X86_RUN_64BIT)
>> +@@ -130,7 +130,7 @@
>> + "bootefi bootmgr ${fdtcontroladdr};" \
>> + "fi;" \
>> + "load ${devtype} ${devnum}:${distro_bootpart} " \
>> +- "${kernel_addr_r} efi/boot/"BOOTEFI_NAME"; " \
>> ++ "${kernel_addr_r} efi/centos/"BOOTEFI_NAME"; " \
>> + "if fdt addr ${fdt_addr_r}; then " \
>> + "bootefi ${kernel_addr_r} ${fdt_addr_r};" \
>> + "else " \
>> +@@ -165,9 +165,9 @@
>> + "run boot_efi_binary\0" \
>> + "scan_dev_for_efi=" \
>> + "if test -e ${devtype} ${devnum}:${distro_bootpart} " \
>> +- "efi/boot/"BOOTEFI_NAME"; then " \
>> ++ "efi/centos/"BOOTEFI_NAME"; then "\
>> + "echo Found EFI removable media binary " \
>> +- "efi/boot/"BOOTEFI_NAME"; " \
>> ++ "efi/centos/"BOOTEFI_NAME"; " \
>> + "run scan_dev_for_dtb; " \
>> + "echo EFI LOAD FAILED: continuing...; " \
>> + "fi; " \
>> +--
>> +2.16.5
>> +
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Arm-dev mailing list
> Arm-dev at centos.org
> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/arm-dev
More information about the Arm-dev
mailing list