From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Petazzoni Date: Wed, 19 May 2021 12:02:37 +0200 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH 1/3] boot/at91bootstrap3: add support for at91bootstrap 4.x series In-Reply-To: <20210519093323.GL2268078@scaer> References: <20210518213749.144355-1-thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com> <20210518213749.144355-2-thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com> <20210519093323.GL2268078@scaer> Message-ID: <20210519120237.52ddc109@windsurf.orange-hotspot> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net Hello Yann, On Wed, 19 May 2021 11:33:23 +0200 "Yann E. MORIN" wrote: > This introduces two issues. > > First, and most important: this means that we now have two "known > versions". However, you forgot to account for the licensing stuff. We > use main.c as a substitute for a license file, but of course main.c > differs between 4.x and 3.x... > > We could carry a per-version hash file, but using main.c as a license > file is really just hidding the issue. IOnstead, I've dropped it > altogether. Aaah, yes, indeed. Thanks for spotting/detecting that. > Eugen, Nicolas (and Simon?): would you care to add an actual license > file to your repository, please? Agreed, Eugen and Nicolas: it would really be better to have a proper LICENSE file in your repo. Please add it to both the 3.x branch and the 4.x branch :-) > The second issue is less of an issue: there were two defconfigs that use > the default 3.x version. Without a tweak, they would have switched over > to using 4.x. So I pinned them with BR2_TARGET_AT91BOOTSTRAP3_LATEST_VERSION_3X. Aah, yes, well spotted. I think we should ask the contributor of these defconfigs to use a fixed version of AT91Bootstrap, because that's normally what we do for bootloader/kernel versions in defconfigs. > With the aboce two issues adressed: applied to next, thanks. Many thanks! Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, co-owner and CEO, Bootlin Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering https://bootlin.com