omap4 hwpack needs to include uboot-mkimage

[John Rigby]

Need to add uboot-mkimage to the omap4 hwpack. This is a work-around for the fact that the omap4 kernel does not recommend uboot-mkimage.

[Loïc Minier (lool)]

NB: This is *not* a bug in the omap4 kernel; mkimage should be pulled in by the hwpack in any case

[Jamie Bennett (jamiebennett)]

Loic, what is your reasoning for the Linaro kernel not to recommend u-boot-mkimage and instead have the hwpack include it?

[Jamie Bennett (jamiebennett)]

At any rate, as we are late in the Linaro cycle I've added this to the OMAP4 hwpack. If we choose to do this in the hwpack the recommends needs removing from the OMAP3 kernel packaging, otherwise it needs adding to the OMAP4 one.

[Loïc Minier (lool)]

On Tue, Nov 02, 2010, Jamie Bennett wrote:
> Loic, what is your reasoning for the Linaro kernel not to recommend u
> -boot-mkimage and instead have the hwpack include it?

 So it's many things; while Linaro only cares about u-boot, some
 platforms have multiple possible bootloaders (e.g. redboot or u-boot
 such as i.mx51, but it can also be alternate proprietary bootloaders),
 the bootloader might be different depending on the subarch, and you
 might also simply not need a bootloader installed on the system!
   In fact, we only really use the bootloader for image building at the
 moment, but it's not update anymore when the package is upgraded.
   Another example is a NFS root: you want the kernel modules and
 headers to be installed, but you don't need the bootloader installed.

 In general, my opiniated view is that package dependencies should be
 kept to a minimum in "leaf" packages which should mostly be used to
 transport files, and "use case" specific dependencies should be
 expressed in separate packages (meta-packages for instance) or tasks.

--
Loïc Minier