[U-Boot] 85xx board maintainership / anyone care?

From: Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@windriver.com>
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de
Subject: [U-Boot] 85xx board maintainership / anyone care?
Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2010 13:29:51 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20101214182950.GA20059@windriver.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <91DBA22F-48EC-4C1C-8AC2-75B011467BBC@kernel.crashing.org>

[Re: [U-Boot] 85xx board maintainership / anyone care?] On 14/12/2010 (Tue 11:10) Becky Bruce wrote:

> 
> On Dec 14, 2010, at 10:59 AM, Paul Gortmaker wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 10:12 AM, Kumar Gala <galak@kernel.crashing.org> wrote:
> >> 
> >> On Dec 14, 2010, at 1:34 AM, Paul Gortmaker wrote:
> >> 
> >>> On Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 11:10 PM, Kumar Gala <galak@kernel.crashing.org> wrote:
> >>>> 
> >>>> On Dec 10, 2010, at 12:21 PM, Kumar Gala wrote:
> >>>> 
> >>>>> MPC8540EVAL
> >>> 
> >>> There might have been one of these relics kicking around somewhere, but I won't
> >>> be able to check until I'm back in Ottawa on Wed.
> >>> 
> >>> If it is just a hardware/validation issue to offset the inevitable
> >>> bitrot, and if I do
> >>> actually have a working board, I could probably build test it.
> >> 
> >> Let me know if you have one.  I'd like more than compile testing on the platform.  We've been build testing it for years now.  I'm more concerned if it actually boots and if anyone cares.
> > 
> > Yeah, I meant to say "boot" not "build".  If I start requiring a physical
> > board in order to just build test, I'll voluntarily surrender my keyboard.
> > 
> > I'll let you know tomorrow when I get back.
> 
> So are we keeping 8540EVAL?  Let me know and I'll look at fixing the problem Paul pointed out with RAMBOOT.

I can test it actually boots (assuming I have the board).  I'm not sure
how to test for Kumar's 2nd question -- i.e. if anyone actually cares.  :)

I'm not sure what the board specs are -- if it is hideously crippled in
terms of tiny amount of RAM and an ancient CPU, then maybe the best
thing is to shoot it in the head and be done with it.  In which case, I
can think of other suitable victims for cull, like the original EST8260
that had all of a whopping 16MB RAM, etc.

Does u-boot have an equivalent to feature-removal-schedule.txt
like the kernel has?  It might not be a bad idea to have something
similar vs. having boards disappear with relatively short notice.
Things like e-mail bounces and people on vacation might mean that
someone who cares simply hadn't seen the notice yet.

Paul.

> 
> -b
> 
> > 
> > Paul.
> > 
> >> 
> >> - k
> > _______________________________________________
> > U-Boot mailing list
> > U-Boot at lists.denx.de
> > http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
> 