OpenBMC Image Management

[Benjamin Herrenschmidt]

On Thu, 2017-08-03 at 00:55 -0500, Patrick Williams wrote:
> But ok, I'll bite.  There are two main reasons we went this path:
> 
>     *  UBIFS is, to the best of my knowledge, a better file system than
>        JFFS2 in pretty much every metric.
> 
>     *  Dynamic volumes are easier to deal with than static volumes,
>        which Adriana spelled out above.
> 
> Is your real question why do we have a file system instead of a raw FFS
> image? 

No that wasn't my real question. I was just wondering why ubifs
compared to jffs2, I was under the impression that ubifs was designed
for large NAND flashes.

I might be wrong, mind you, but I remember reading that it had
significant overhead for a small flash.

Cheers,
Ben.