From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Peter Korsgaard Date: Thu, 02 Feb 2012 17:11:03 +0100 Subject: [Buildroot] [git commit] boot: only show vendor-specific bootloaders for applicable arm variant In-Reply-To: <20120202170059.42c7b05e@skate> (Thomas Petazzoni's message of "Thu, 2 Feb 2012 17:00:59 +0100") References: <20120201224701.C13259097B@busybox.osuosl.org> <20120202164743.30dfab12@skate> <87ipjp9ql2.fsf@macbook.be.48ers.dk> <20120202170059.42c7b05e@skate> Message-ID: <87ehud9pwo.fsf@macbook.be.48ers.dk> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net >>>>> "Thomas" == Thomas Petazzoni writes: Thomas> Le Thu, 02 Feb 2012 16:56:25 +0100, Thomas> Peter Korsgaard a ?crit : >> True. Is that a common use case? If so then I'll revert. Thomas> I don't know if it's a common use case. But I would suspect that many Thomas> newcomers do not necessarily select the right sub-architecture. But I Thomas> don't have a strong opinion with your regard to your patch. I just Thomas> think that people may not discover that those bootloaders are available Thomas> in Buildroot. If that's the case, then we have the same problems with SoC specific packages like gst-dsp or armv7 only things like valgrind. Thomas> However, as discussed on IRC, we might see an increase of Thomas> platform-specific packages (3D drivers and libraries, codecs Thomas> and DSP stuff, etc.), so maybe we'll need some way of selecting Thomas> the platform in order to show only the relevant packages? Or Thomas> maybe simply by organizing the packages like: Thomas> Platform specific packages -> Thomas> Texas Instruments OMAP packages -> Thomas> Freescale i.MX packages -> Thomas> ... Yes, I guess something like that is needed. We should make sure we don't make it too complicated though. -- Bye, Peter Korsgaard