From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Petazzoni Date: Fri, 12 Feb 2021 09:24:58 +0100 Subject: [Buildroot] Buildroot defconfig issues In-Reply-To: <582a548d-b9e3-39dc-f234-10a31e0a355d@mind.be> References: <6025e87c3e3ce_c6a70d4128370@gitlab-sidekiq-catchall-v1-bb68c6455-8rbvh.mail> <20210212091348.75f9cd17@windsurf.home> <582a548d-b9e3-39dc-f234-10a31e0a355d@mind.be> Message-ID: <20210212092458.165a3ec7@windsurf.home> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net Hello, On Fri, 12 Feb 2021 09:17:53 +0100 Arnout Vandecappelle wrote: > I propose to just remove this defconfig. We're not really happy with those > non-minimal defconfigs, right. I think it only makes sense to keep something > like that if there really is something board-specific in there, which is not the > case here I think. Well, we've got several of these "development" defconfigs for Atmel/Microchip platforms: at91sam9x5ek_dev_defconfig at91sam9x5ek_mmc_dev_defconfig atmel_sama5d27_som1_ek_mmc_dev_defconfig atmel_sama5d2_xplained_mmc_dev_defconfig atmel_sama5d3_xplained_dev_defconfig atmel_sama5d3_xplained_mmc_dev_defconfig atmel_sama5d4_xplained_dev_defconfig atmel_sama5d4_xplained_mmc_dev_defconfig microchip_sam9x60ek_mmc_dev_defconfig microchip_sama5d27_wlsom1_ek_mmc_dev_defconfig There was quite some debate back then on whether we wanted them or not in upstream Buildroot. Microchip has its own BR2_EXTERNAL layer at https://github.com/linux4sam/buildroot-external-microchip with a bunch of other defconfigs. But Arnout, I thought you were inclined to having "demo" defconfigs in Buildroot upstream. Have you changed your mind ? Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Bootlin Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering https://bootlin.com