[oe] RFC: making uboot safe for multimachine and agree on one spelling

[Koen Kooi]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Harald Welte schreef:
> On Fri, Feb 16, 2007 at 07:00:47PM +0100, Koen Kooi wrote:
>  
>> After spending some time going trough u-boot recipes trying to make sense of its
>> buildsystem, I noticed some strange problems and inconsistencies.
>>
>> First the easy part: we need *one* spelling for u-boot, instead of uboot, u-boot, u-bot,
>> etc. What is the preferred one nowadays?
> 
> u-boot is the official name, so I would recommend to go for that (even
> though I hate hyphens inside project names)
> 
>> Second: it seems that the 'mkimage' tool is at least arch speficic (at worst
>> board-specific), so uboot recipes should install it to
>> ${STAGING_NATIVE_DIR}/mkimage.u-boot.${MACHINE_ARCH}
> 
> are you sure it's arch specific? 


I'm not sure, but mkimage refuses to build with all kind of missing definitions if you
don't have a board configured. It could be some safeguard to force people to have a board
definition.

> I'm quite surprised about that, since
> the uImage format contains a header indicating the architecture, doesn't
> it?
> 
> If it really uses a different binary format for each arch, yes, we
> should change it.  'mkuimage.${MACHINE_ARCH}' sounds like a more user
> friendly name, though.

And it avoid the hyphens :)

regards,

Koen

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin)

iD8DBQFF1h/GMkyGM64RGpERAro9AJsGhesMzZ7CV8ooPz9L25+wQVdEJQCfQJ66
KUR4UJy42goEBy1tAkjBtVE=
=bM7g
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----