From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: To: Matthew McClintock From: Wolfgang Denk Subject: Re: [RFC] New target 'cuImage' - compatibility uImage Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 02 Aug 2006 15:59:06 CDT." <1154552346.5550.51.camel@localhost> Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2006 00:33:02 +0200 Sender: wd@denx.de Message-Id: <20060802223302.9667135360F@atlas.denx.de> Cc: linuxppc-dev List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , In message <1154552346.5550.51.camel@localhost> you wrote: > > And the new cuImage will look like this: > > ------------------------------------- > - compressed uImage - - > - ------------------------------- - - > - - _start - - - > - - boot wrapper code - - - > - - ----------------------------- - - > - - - device tree - - - > - - ----------------------------- - - > - - ----------------------------- - - > - - - - - - > - - - UNcompressed - - - > - - - kernel image - - - > - - - - - - > - - ----------------------------- - - > - --------------------------------- - > ------------------------------------- Please explain. In my understanding, an "uImage" file is a image consisting of an U-Boot header (64 bytes) followed by an (compressed or uncompressed) Linux kernel image. So what do you mean by "compressed uImage"? If you take an "uImage" file according to above definition and compress it, it will not be recognized by U-Boot. And why do you need a second, "UNcompressed kernel image" in your setup? I must be missing something, because including *two* kernel images makes no sense to me, and I don't understand why you would want to insist of an "UNcompressed" image... Best regards, Wolfgang Denk -- Software Engineering: Embedded and Realtime Systems, Embedded Linux Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: wd@denx.de 1st Old Man: Gee, its windy today. 2nd Old Man: No it's not... it's Thursday. 3rd Old Man: Yeh, me too. Let's go for a beer.