From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Marek Vasut <marek.vasut@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2011 16:01:45 +0100
Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 3/3] image: Allow images to indicate they're
	loadable at any address
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.2.02.1111080847540.3307@xanadu.home>
References: <1320164902-24190-1-git-send-email-swarren@nvidia.com>
	<20111108083326.EB9C013BE08A@gemini.denx.de>
	<alpine.LFD.2.02.1111080847540.3307@xanadu.home>
Message-ID: <201111081601.45563.marek.vasut@gmail.com>
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 Tue, 8 Nov 2011, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> > In message <alpine.LFD.2.02.1111071840080.3307@xanadu.home> you wrote:
> > > > I understand you are referring here to zImages only. Correct?
> > > 
> > > Correct.  Anything else is not relocatable.
> > > 
> > > > Or will raw images (without the preloader) be fully relocatable, too?
> > > 
> > > No.
> > 
> > OK. So the situation on ARM is basicly not different from what we
> > have on other architectures.

[...]

> > I already NAKed these patches, and this discussion has made it clear
> > to me that this was a correct decision.  What you want is not uImages.
> 
> You are therefore denying me the ability to use the kernel according to
> the use case I care about.  Maybe I should reconsider my willingness to
> let you use raw kernel image then?  Because if you are not willing to
> collaborate for the case I care about, why should I care about yours?
> 
> 
> Nicolas

Nico, will it be OK if we/you implemented "bootz" command to boot zImages? Will 
that be satifying for you? I understand Wolfgang isn't oposed to such solution.

M