From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Scott Wood <scottwood@freescale.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2013 17:10:03 -0600
Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/4] common: imx: Implement generic u-boot.nand
 target
In-Reply-To: <201302260817.41960.marex@denx.de> (from marex@denx.de on Tue
	Feb 26 01:17:41 2013)
Message-ID: <1361920203.12570.13@snotra>
List-Id: <u-boot.lists.denx.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de

On 02/26/2013 01:17:41 AM, Marek Vasut wrote:
> Dear Scott Wood,
> 
> > On 02/25/2013 05:03:30 PM, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > > Dear Scott Wood,
> > >
> > > > So maybe we need a more general (but optional)  
> CONFIG_BUILD_TARGET.
> > >
> > > Can you elaborate?
> >
> > Same as CONFIG_SPL_TARGET, but not SPL-specific.  Basically a way  
> for a
> > board config file to add to $(ALL-y).
> >
> > > > So each one would set the appropriate CONFIG_BUILD_TARGET for
> > >
> > > whatever
> > >
> > > > needs to get built, and then something like CONFIG_NAND_IMAGE  
> could
> > > > hold the image name that should be linked to produce a standard
> > > > u-boot-nand.bin output.
> > >
> > > Yea, sounds reasonable. But why call it CONFIG_ , it can't be  
> stored
> > > in the
> > > board.h files, it has to be somewhere in the Makefile hierarchy.
> >
> > Why can't it go in the board.h files?
> 
> How would a config file contain the CPU-specific portions of a  
> Makefile?

The target rule itself would need to go somewhere in a makefile, but  
just pointing at which target to use, and which image to link, can go  
in config.h -- just like CONFIG_SPL_TARGET does.

-Scott