[meta-freescale] [meta-fsl-arm][PATCH] image_types_fsl.bbclass: Use FAT 32 for images larger than 512MB

[Otavio Salvador]

On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 2:47 PM, Tzu-Jung Lee <roylee17 at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 10:18 AM, Otavio Salvador
> <otavio.salvador at ossystems.com.br> wrote:
>> On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 8:27 PM, Tzu-Jung Lee <roylee17 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Refers to the following commit of poky for more detail.
>>>
>>> commit 722430a488f39bf583e4a557a254fb84fae4d0a7
>>> Author: Darren Hart <dvhart at linux.intel.com>
>>> Date:   Wed Dec 12 14:39:15 2012 -0800
>>>
>>>     bootimg: Use FAT 32 for images larger than 512MB
>>>
>>>         Fixes [YOCTO #2138]
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Tzu-Jung Lee <roylee17 at currantlabs.com>
>>
>> I am not against the change however I am curious why we cannot use FAT
>> 32 for everything?
>>
>
> FAT32 spec requires at least 65525 sectors, which will be around 32MB
> with 512-byte sectors.
> Images like core-image-minimal, or other reduced image is too small for that.
> Some systems (e.x. OS X) reject to mount the image (dd'ed disk) if it
> doesn't comply the spec.
>
> Upstream tried to solve it by letting the mkfs.vfat itself to decide
> which of FAT16/32 is appropriate for the image.
> But it failed to use FAT32 for some larger images. So the solution was
> to manually decide which FSTYPE.

Agreed; it is indeed a good reason.

Can you please rebase this on top of master?

-- 
Otavio Salvador                             O.S. Systems
http://www.ossystems.com.br        http://code.ossystems.com.br
Mobile: +55 (53) 9981-7854            Mobile: +1 (347) 903-9750