From: Marek Vasut <marex@denx.de>
To: Otavio Salvador <otavio.salvador@ossystems.com.br>
Cc: Otavio Salvador <otavio@ossystems.com.br>,
Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer
<openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] u-boot: Update to 2016.01 release
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2016 16:53:11 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <201601131653.11865.marex@denx.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAP9ODKohVDvN=bnowqXaHa_3yNvOf70EevWwV6T9rrNLbEHxOA@mail.gmail.com>
On Wednesday, January 13, 2016 at 04:39:53 PM, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 12:34 PM, Marek Vasut <marex@denx.de> wrote:
> > On Wednesday, January 13, 2016 at 01:04:31 PM, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> >> On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 1:36 AM, Marek Vasut <marex@denx.de> wrote:
> >> > Upgrade U-Boot to latest version and drop upstreamed patches.
> >> >
> >> > Repair configuration of U-Boot during build. It is no longer
> >> > possible to run "make foomachine" in U-Boot. Instead, it is
> >> > necessary to do "make foomachine_defconfig ; make". Fix this
> >> > in u-boot.inc and u-boot-fw-utils*.bb .
> >>
> >> Please drop this config suffix, from u-boot.inc. The config value
> >> should be used as is and the respective BSP ought to be fixed to
> >> change _config to _defconfig.
> >
> > If I don't have the _defconfig there AND I define UBOOT_MACHINE in my
> > machine file, it will call "make machine", which no longer works.
>
> I know and the right fix is to use the right value to UBOOT_MACHINE as
> we do for KERNEL_DEVICETREE.
So what is the right value ? UBOOT_MACHINE := "foo_defconfig" ? This does
not sound right at all.
And what is the right value of UBOOT_CONFIG then ?
> Doing this 'under the hood' change hides wrong settings and I think we
> should no do this. the defconfig is in use for a while (2 release,
> from YP point of view) and people had time to move the BSP to use
> proper values.
Best regards,
Marek Vasut
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-01-13 15:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-01-13 3:36 [PATCH] u-boot: Update to 2016.01 release Marek Vasut
2016-01-13 4:49 ` Khem Raj
2016-01-13 5:01 ` Marek Vasut
2016-01-13 6:42 ` Khem Raj
2016-01-13 12:04 ` Otavio Salvador
2016-01-13 14:34 ` Marek Vasut
2016-01-13 15:39 ` Otavio Salvador
2016-01-13 15:53 ` Marek Vasut [this message]
2016-01-13 15:55 ` Otavio Salvador
2016-01-13 16:30 ` Marek Vasut
2016-01-13 16:40 ` Otavio Salvador
2016-01-13 17:09 ` Marek Vasut
2016-01-13 17:16 ` Otavio Salvador
2016-01-13 17:42 ` Marek Vasut
2016-01-13 17:56 ` Otavio Salvador
2016-01-13 20:35 ` Marek Vasut
2016-01-13 20:57 ` Otavio Salvador
2016-01-13 22:09 ` Tom Rini
2016-01-14 20:43 ` Otavio Salvador
2016-01-14 21:15 ` Marek Vasut
2016-01-14 21:37 ` Otavio Salvador
2016-01-14 21:41 ` Marek Vasut
2016-01-14 23:42 ` Otavio Salvador
2016-01-15 1:07 ` Marek Vasut
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=201601131653.11865.marex@denx.de \
--to=marex@denx.de \
--cc=openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org \
--cc=otavio.salvador@ossystems.com.br \
--cc=otavio@ossystems.com.br \
/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