From: Peter Seiderer <ps.report@gmx.net>
To: buildroot@busybox.net
Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH/next v1] package/mfgtools: bump version to uuu_1.4.43
Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2020 20:00:46 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20201207200046.0c9fbbdd@gmx.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <X8pQj5rEBlPRBVu3@p1g2>
Hello Gary, J?rg,
On Fri, 4 Dec 2020 16:06:55 +0100, Gary Bisson <gary.bisson@boundarydevices.com> wrote:
> Hi Peter,
>
> First, sorry for the delay, it's been a crazy week.
>
> On Tue, Dec 01, 2020 at 09:31:02PM +0100, Peter Seiderer wrote:
> > - remove dependency on BR2_arm
> > - update Config.in.host help text (mention NXP, mention uuu)
> > - change upstream URL to https://github.com/NXPmicro/mfgtools (as
> > https://github.com/codeauroraforum/mfgtools redirects to it)
> > - remove legacy patch 0001-lnx_def.h-fix-conflicting-declaration-of-__time64_t.patch
> > - remove legacy readme.txt
> > - update licence and LICENSE hash
> > - remove legacy README.txt license hash
> > - use upload tar.gz archive
> > - add new dependencies: host-pkgconf host-bzip2 host-libzip
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Peter Seiderer <ps.report@gmx.net>
> > ---
> > Notes:
> > - @Gary Bisson: as it seems a complete rewrite of the tool
> > (compared to the old mfgtoolcli) and you provided an
> > fix for the old one lately: does it make sense to update/overwrite
> > the mfgtools package or should I provide the uuu tool as a
> > new package (any naming suggestions)?
>
> Yes actually there's been a lot of discussion about that one already:
> - First I did a patch similar as yours that was rejected not to remove
> the legacy mfgtools package [1]. The naming suggested was "imx-uuu"
> - Then Jorg did offer some patches to add "imx-uuu" [2]
> -> not sure why this one is marked as superseded?
> -> all I remember is that the second patch of that series wasn't
> accepted as we agreed in [1] that mfgtools should stay as legacy as
> long as it builds basically.
Sorry for missing the previous patches/discussion (and inventing the
the same/similar patch set again ;-))...
Package name imx-uuu seems reasonable (despite the name of the git
repository)...
>
> So adding Jorg to this thread to figure out which is the best imx-uuu
> package. My only remark on Jorg package is that the Kconfig comment
> talks about UTP whereas UTP was for mfgtools (first of its name) whereas
> UUU only uses SDP to load binaries into RAM and then fastboot to flash.
Will try to re-spin a new patch set based on yours/J?rg work...
Regards,
Peter
>
> Regards,
> Gary
>
> [1] http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/buildroot/patch/20190608105337.19879-1-bisson.gary at gmail.com/
> [2] http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/buildroot/patch/20200109191020.1282319-1-joerg.krause at embedded.rocks/
prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-12-07 19:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-12-01 20:31 [Buildroot] [PATCH/next v1] package/mfgtools: bump version to uuu_1.4.43 Peter Seiderer
2020-12-04 15:06 ` Gary Bisson
2020-12-07 19:00 ` Peter Seiderer [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20201207200046.0c9fbbdd@gmx.net \
--to=ps.report@gmx.net \
--cc=buildroot@busybox.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox