On 24.08.2010, at 19:55, Hannes Hirzel wrote:

> On 8/24/10, Bert Freudenberg <bert at freudenbergs.de> wrote:
>> What I'm saying is that unless one is trying to move things between the
>> unloadable packages, I see no reason to not have them in loadable order.
> 
> You mean that you want to treat all the unloaded packages as one large
> image segment?

No. I was just talking about the update map. "Package" means "source code" here.

- Bert -

> The attached drawing is intended to illustrate that we are talking
> about Trunk update (black arrow , the current package) and update of
> the image with packages unloaded (green arrow). And it seems that
> 'Reloading' has to be addresses as well (Red arrow).
> 
> The black and the green Trunk update could be combined in a single
> update which distinguishes what packages are there (that was one
> suggestion in this thread).
> The other idea is just to have two different trunk updates - one for
> the minimal image, one for the unloaded packages.
> 
> I read in the meeting notes that the infrastructure has to be set up
> for this and as the discussion in this thread has show so far
> 
> 1) Unloading works actually fine
> 2) But there is the need for an infrastructure around it (this
> includes 'reloading')
> 
> --Hannes
> <MinimalTrunkImage.png>