From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: From: Brian Waite To: Tom Rini , Steven Scholz Subject: Re: BOOT_TARGET pImage & uImage ??? Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 14:22:28 -0400 Cc: LinuxPPC References: <3F65917D.1020502@imc-berlin.de> <3F699255.4050000@imc-berlin.de> <20030918180834.GC6692@ip68-0-152-218.tc.ph.cox.net> In-Reply-To: <20030918180834.GC6692@ip68-0-152-218.tc.ph.cox.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Message-Id: <200309181422.32546.waite@skycomputers.com> Sender: owner-linuxppc-embedded@lists.linuxppc.org List-Id: > What I want is three things: > 1) The 'mkimage' target must be done in such a fashion that it will > never run into a 'cannot execute' problem. My suggestion is to have the > Makefile do a: > @chmod +x mkimage.sh > Or so. In 2.5/2.6, the build system will handle this for you, > automagically, on .sh files I believe. For 2.4, you must handle this > explicitly. Altough messy, I make this happen in the patch I supply. I can change it to do the straight chmod in the scrip[ts directory if that is cleaner. > 2) Do we really need 'pImage' and 'uImage' or can we just have 'uImage' > ? I think uImage is enough. Wolfgang strongly discourages any use of PPCBoot these days and it just seems silly. > 3) I really (really!) want a patch for 2.4 and 2.5/2.6 at the same time. This was one of the reasons for not supplying the patch previously. I will try to pull together a 2.5/2.6 patch but I have not worked under 2.5/2.6 at all. When I initially did the 2.4 patch I pulled the 2.5 tree but I didn't have time to understand the layout. Also, unless someone has a board that will boot a uImage target I can only supply an untested patch. I'll take some time and see if I can pull something I am comfortable with in the next few days. Is there anyone who could help with testing? Thanks Brian ** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/