592 replies to this topic

[littlesat]

This solution or the approach to a solution results from the neutrino.
It's certainly an interesting and beautiful solution, but it's an intrusion into the existing bootloader system.

If you want to do this, you can do this via the path of the first image on the part of the providers described above.
I would appreciate not changing the bootloader.
As with many other receivers, this inevitably leads to constant changes to the bootloader / Flash-Layout.
To be honest, you can save yourself these unnecessary construction sites.

My opinion about it

+1

[twol]

@rantanplan
@littlesat

 

Obviously neither of you have tried it.
There are no changes to the current OE-A builds for the Vu+ 4K boxes, other than a couple of additions. So No changes to Vu+ bootloader, no changes to flash or partition layout
..... and as it just builds off the current multiboot implementations in most images, can host images in a multiboot environment without changes where eMMC slots are being utilised.

.. and if someone wants to revert to the standard one image Vu+ partition,  that can be done quite simply by a straight forward image flash.

 

 
 

[foxbob]

Who can, add this feature.The user will have the choice to use a multiboot or leave it as it is.

[neo]

Afaik Tech is or will be looking at it.

[rantanplan]

There is a working Flash layout and that's all you need to use an image.

It doesn't matter what I 'tried' or not.

The problem with all this 'multiboot' is also the constant changing of the layout.
We can see that in the problems that keep coming up.
If you now comply with every wish to change the Flash layout, then everyone will go crazy.

If you want to use an image, you can flash it.
Where is the problem?
How bored are you all?
Just want to spend all day switching back and forth between images?

In addition, there is the possibility of flashing this image and 'allegedly' everything works.
Then there is no problem with pli in Flash 3 either.

I don't understand this interest in the possibility of flashing 10 different images at the same time.

Only to then find any minimal error even faster in parallel?

I don't care what the Flash layout looks like.
The main thing is that it works.

If you change the layout, then you should carefully inform all your users about it, otherwise there will be very big problems.
Not all users want to compare 4 images all day long.
Most users expect an image to run when they need it.
One image!
Not more. They watch TV and record something and are happy that it works.

sorry for this point of view, but I really don't think a toy like the multiboot is essential.
 

[Huevos]

This solution or the approach to a solution results from the neutrino.
It's certainly an interesting and beautiful solution, but it's an intrusion into the existing bootloader system.

If you want to do this, you can do this via the path of the first image on the part of the providers described above.
I would appreciate not changing the bootloader.
As with many other receivers, this inevitably leads to constant changes to the bootloader / Flash-Layout.
To be honest, you can save yourself these unnecessary construction sites.

My opinion about it

I don't know what you are talking about, Neutrino or bootloaders.

[Huevos]

There is a working Flash layout and that's all you need to use an image.

It doesn't matter what I 'tried' or not.

The problem with all this 'multiboot' is also the constant changing of the layout.
We can see that in the problems that keep coming up.
If you now comply with every wish to change the Flash layout, then everyone will go crazy.

If you want to use an image, you can flash it.
Where is the problem?
How bored are you all?
Just want to spend all day switching back and forth between images?

In addition, there is the possibility of flashing this image and 'allegedly' everything works.
Then there is no problem with pli in Flash 3 either.

I don't understand this interest in the possibility of flashing 10 different images at the same time.

Only to then find any minimal error even faster in parallel?

I don't care what the Flash layout looks like.
The main thing is that it works.

If you change the layout, then you should carefully inform all your users about it, otherwise there will be very big problems.
Not all users want to compare 4 images all day long.
Most users expect an image to run when they need it.
One image!
Not more. They watch TV and record something and are happy that it works.

sorry for this point of view, but I really don't think a toy like the multiboot is essential.
 

You are arguing about the usefulness of multiboot. That is something that PLi already has already incorporated into the image, so PLi must think it is useful.

 

This thread is about getting that multiboot that is already there to work on Vu hardware.

[rantanplan]

@Huevos

I'm not sure what you want to tell me?

Not pli, but so far the manufacturers have created their flash areas (layout).

If this had remained the same in the images, then there would not have been so much discussion about it.
It hasn't stayed the same though, and all image makers add something different to it.

And yes I know what I'm talking about.
And no, I don't have any of those excellent VU+ receivers.

I know that even the people involved in the image get confused when testing with the different layouts.

So these are not small problems, but rather a big problem for the user who only wants to use one image.

I'm just sharing my point of view.

[DimitarCC]

Well in my opinion the multiboot is useful for example for plugin or skin developers that want to try their creations on different images. Flashing them just to check is crazy!

VU+ receivers doesn't have multiboot built in by manufacturer so what's the problem somebody else to do that if VU will never do it?

I am kind of surprised by all this denial/hardness of every change proposed.

I am also just telling my point of view

[Huevos]

@rantenplan "rather a big problem for the user who only wants to use one image."

 

No idea what that means. They can use it if they choose. Otherwise they don't need to.

 

If the hardware permits multiboot the multiboot user interface is the same for all users irrespective of hardware even if different manufacturers do things differently behind the scenes.

 

"I'm not sure what you want to tell me?"

 

This thread is not about should we add multiboot? Yes/No? That question was answered years ago and multiboot was added.

 

The thread is about making multiboot work on hardware on which it previously didn't.

Edited by Huevos, 8 March 2023 - 09:29.

[littlesat]

"There is a working Flash layout and that's all you need to use an image"....

 

The above is the only thing you need... a Flash layout that is compatible with multiboot that is almost in all images now (as it seems they all adapt to the standard I made years ago - at that time I was also in discussion directly with manufacturs)... so doing this right we need a flash layout with the correct partitions and a kind of bootloader that startup the correct stuff from the flash. In addition the ofg flashtool should also be compatible with it.

 

When this suggestion is compatible with the ofg flashtool, it can start the correct selected image it should be something that is NOT IMAGE DEPENDED... but just a thing that get the VU+ correctly configured for it.

 

So I prefer something stand-alone that prepare the VU+ boxes for multiboot... (as VU+ itself never did it)/

Edited by littlesat, 8 March 2023 - 11:13.

[Huevos]

The ofgwrite is compatible with this system. That is how we couch flash our images. Anyway it appears from your random comments you haven't tried it yet.

[rantanplan]

The ofgwrite is compatible with this system. That is how we couch flash our images. Anyway it appears from your random comments you haven't tried it yet.

Do you see....
That's where the problem begins.
You will not flash the new image with modified Layout via ofgwrite.
You have to flash it via USB and use it to activate the changed layout.

You can't just hide the known problems.

I have a feeling you're only trying to attack me personally.
It's not worth it to me.

From my point of view, the interest of a few users is forced on the users who just want to use an image.

As mentioned...
It's possible for all those  image testers (for whatever reason).
You can still flash the mentioned image and use this all-important multiboot.
since 2 year2 neutrino in flash and you would have multiboot.
BH for about 2 months now.

I can't understand the aggressiveness that's coming up here.

So I'm out of here

[Ev0]

 

The ofgwrite is compatible with this system. That is how we couch flash our images. Anyway it appears from your random comments you haven't tried it yet.

You will not flash the new image with modified Layout via ofgwrite.
You have to flash it via USB and use it to activate the changed layout.
 

Wrong

[Aliraza63]

OBH creation is an option for the users who want to play it in multiboot its not for all . nobody compels users to use this feature. its user's own choice totally. 

Rather than arguing and criticizing each other I think it should be a healthy discussion between us . let the user decide if he wants to use this feature or not .

One thing have to appreciate OBH has made it possible where the VU+ was denying to do so but we all see  it needs more time and more efforts to make it perfect .

I have never found open pli is a multiboot friendly .even the omb in its feeds is not working properly . so why its the part of the feed ?.

If open pli doesn't like multiboot feature so its there own choice it doesnt mean they cant do it .

[littlesat]

Again is SHOULD not be image depended... it should be something that divide the flash as it should be and arrange a kind of bootloader is added so the correct image is booted at a reboot or power on.... In all other hardware it is not IN the oimage....

Edited by littlesat, 8 March 2023 - 13:09.

[Ev0]

Again is SHOULD not be image depended... it should be something that divide the flash as it should be and arrange a kind of bootloader is added so the correct image is booted at a reboot or power on.... In all other hardware it is not IN the oimage....

Should be, but isn't and won't ever be as Vu+ made it clear they have no interest in adding Multiboot.

The correct image is booted at reboot or power on already.

[Aliraza63]

Again is SHOULD not be image depended... it should be something that divide the flash as it should be and arrange a kind of bootloader is added so the correct image is booted at a reboot or power on.... In all other hardware it is not IN the oimage....

 

Simple question 

Who will do this ?  Vu + is dead silent for this project 

[Huevos]

Again is SHOULD not be image depended... it should be something that divide the flash as it should be and arrange a kind of bootloader is added so the correct image is booted at a reboot or power on.... In all other hardware it is not IN the oimage....

Littlesat, every multiboot image, e.g. zgemma series, has a recovery image, and that image does not come from the manufacturer, but the image teams.

[littlesat]

'has a recovery image' -> Now we get to the point.... note these recovery images are not depended on the image builders... this is something 'general' that prepares the box for multiboot.... The same thing I also prefer for VU+...