From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2002 09:10:54 -0700 From: Tom Rini To: Marius Groeger Cc: linuxppc-embedded@lists.linuxppc.org, d.mueller@elsoft.ch, Wolfgang Denk , steven.scholz@imc-berlin.de Subject: Re: 'pImage' and 'uImage' targets Message-ID: <20021122161054.GS779@opus.bloom.county> References: <20021122150542.GM779@opus.bloom.county> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: Sender: owner-linuxppc-embedded@lists.linuxppc.org List-Id: On Fri, Nov 22, 2002 at 05:05:01PM +0100, Marius Groeger wrote: > On Fri, 22 Nov 2002, Tom Rini wrote: > > > Next, is it necessary to have both targets, as they produce the same > > exact output? I can see this for 2.4 since I'm sure both work in 2.4 > > and both have insturctions says to use {u,p}Image. But will the PPCBoot > > Since the U-Boot now contains our port to several ARM platforms and > the i386 port is more than upcoming, we would also need those targets > in the corresponding arch trees as well. Now how are we going to > handle _that_ without duplicating Make-code/scripts? Convincing Linus / Marcelo to put the script into scripts/ and then getting the arch maintainers to add uImage targets? -- Tom Rini (TR1265) http://gate.crashing.org/~trini/ ** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/