From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Behan Webster Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 10:27:51 -0400 Subject: [U-Boot-Users] In kernel mkimage In-Reply-To: <469C8990.2070309@anagramm.de> References: <625fc13d0707161904n66692bc5v7d337fda7ac5c611@mail.gmail.com> <469C8990.2070309@anagramm.de> Message-ID: <469CD1E7.2090609@websterwood.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de Clemens Koller wrote: > Josh Boyer schrieb: > >> As part of my on-going 4xx work in the arch/powerpc kernel, I've been >> toying with the idea of creating an in-kernel copy of the mkimage >> tool, similar to how we have a mktree tool for the older OpenBIOS >> firmware. >> > > Don't duplicate code, if it ain't necessary. Improve documentation > that make tells what's missing and how to fix it. > I agree. Code shouldn't be duplicated. Instead, perhaps the code should be moved (and maintained) in the kernel tree. mkimage is used for building kernel images (and other related things like ramdisk images). Building u-boot (for the use of one tool) should not be a necessary part of building a kernel image. Many people never need to build u-boot being content with the bootloader that shipped with their embedded target. Lowering the barrier to entry to the use of u-boot (i.e. by allowing kernels to be more easily built for it) will encourage more to use it. More people using it will eventually lead to more people interested in learning about the code. It also cuts down on people asking a FAQ. It also puts a tool in the kernel tree which encourages others to use u-boot as their boot loader. :) It's a win-win solution. -- Behan Webster behanw at websterwood.com