A ticket has been open for backporting the fix: https://bugzilla.yoctoproject.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14971

On Thu, Nov 3, 2022 at 11:38 PM, Zoran wrote:

• for imageType in ${KERNEL_IMAGETYPES} ; do
• for imageType in ${KERNEL_IMAGETYPE_FOR_MAKE} ; do

Interesting... What is the difference between variables ${KERNEL_IMAGETYPES} and ${KERNEL_IMAGETYPE_FOR_MAKE} ?

In my setup I have:

• KERNEL_IMAGETYPES=fitImage (coming from KERNEL_IMAGETYPE of my machine configuration)
• KERNEL_IMAGETYPE_FOR_MAKE=Image (used only internally by kernel.bbclass and setting to Image because of this line

- for imageType in ${KERNEL_IMAGETYPES} ; do
+ for imageType in ${KERNEL_IMAGETYPE_FOR_MAKE} ; do

Hello, I'm currently migrating our system from warrior to dunfell and I have an issue on fitImage support for aarch64 architecture. We use KERNEL_IMAGETYPE = "fitImage" and INITRAMFS_IMAGE_BUNDLE = "1" in our configuration and the kernel do_deploy steps failed on not finding the initramfs file:

```
| lib/modules/4.19.255-rt113-sigfox/kernel/drivers/usb/serial/usb_wwan.ko
| lib/modules/4.19.255-rt113-sigfox/kernel/drivers/usb/serial/option.ko
| lib/modules/4.19.255-rt113-sigfox/kernel/drivers/usb/class/
| lib/modules/4.19.255-rt113-sigfox/kernel/drivers/usb/class/cdc-wdm.ko
| lib/modules/4.19.255-rt113-sigfox/modules.order
| lib/modules/4.19.255-rt113-sigfox/modules.builtin
| install: cannot stat 'arch/arm64/boot/Image.initramfs': No such file or directory
| WARNING: exit code 1 from a shell command.
| ERROR: Execution of '/home/fmartinsons/TAPOS_build_for_dunfell/build-tapos/tmp/work/a3700-tapos-linux/linux-sbs/4.19.255+gitAUTOINC+5c7ccbe1aa-r4.17.1.1/temp/run.do_deploy.1460182' failed with exit code 1
```

Doing some more research, I found that the problem came from this change https://git.openembedded.org/openembedded-core/commit/?id=526bdd88ccd758204452579333ba188e29270bde , I found a commit introduced in kirkstone that fix my issue (at least the part which revert the previous commit): https://git.openembedded.org/openembedded-core/commit/?id=10a4a132e87e835726bf5da81a60f6f509b90765

Can somebody know why the commit was not back-ported in dunfell ?

Regards.