[Buildroot] What's up with the kernel names? (Again)

[Ulf Samuelsson <ulf.samuelsson@atmel.com>]

>>>>>> "Ulf" == Ulf Samuelsson <ulf.samuelsson@atmel.com> writes:
>
> Hi,
>
> Ulf> I don't see anywhere where the kernel name is referenced in u-boot
> Ulf> except for the generation of the script, which I fixed. Looks like
> Ulf> Peter is also unable to guess what you are talking about. Perhaps you
> Ulf> might care to enlighten us.
>
> Ulf> ==> Look at the u.-boot patches in device/Atmel/arch-arm/
>
> Ulf, see again why hiding that kind of "magic" under target/device is
> bad? If things break for specific platforms because they have feature
> patches hidden away under target/device then I think it's pretty
> unrealistic for other developers to fix it.
>
> Ulf> ==> I designed the advanced linux configuration to tightly fit
> Ulf> together with u-boot
> Ulf>        to mimize the hassle of getting the board up and running.
> Ulf>        You can always build the classic linux configuration
> Ulf> target/linux/Makefile.in",
> Ulf>        so unless you are prepared to go the whole way, why meddle?
>
> So maybe the problems we're seing is in that design? I don't use the
> linux-advanced stuff, but my feeling is that there's too much "magic"
> going around here, and that things are too specialized.
>

The advanced kernel build allows you to build any kernel since 2.6.22.
It allows you to take any patch from kernel.org and apply.
It allows you to take patches for a group of parts, I.E AT91 or AVR32
and it allows you to make a board specific patch.
It also allows you to take any patch you desire and apply on top.

It does not get to be more general purpose than that..

Anyone can, if they want to, add similar patchsets for other chips.
The fact that this has not happened, does not make this "specialized".

I do not see why, if  Thiagos only problem is that the build is not called 
uImage,
he cannot use the "simple kernel build"
As I see it, he wants to use 95% what I have written and then destroy the 
final stage.
I think that sucks.


> But that's a discussion for another day.
>
>

Best Regards
Ulf Samuelsson