From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Michael Schwingen Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 09:18:14 +0200 Subject: [U-Boot-Users] 1.1.4 and 2.6 kernel In-Reply-To: <29f916510606271919t6a3f40c7t4013d4591a09e6be@mail.gmail.com> References: <29f916510606270143g5d143086oaa336b93f2225495@mail.gmail.com> <44A16A8B.4070106@discworld.dascon.de> <29f916510606271919t6a3f40c7t4013d4591a09e6be@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <44A22D36.8090805@discworld.dascon.de> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de alfred hitch wrote: > Hi Michael, Everyone, > > Thanks for your replies. > Michael: Looks like we do have something in common. This is a very > serious observation. So, correct me if I a wrong. Did the same kernel > give you traces with redboot but not u-boot. (We are together) > Correct. I could change between redboot and u-boot and observe this behaviour. > Did same kernel crash later on with u-boot and not redboot ? As in I > am curious to know that did change in boot loader cause some other > issue apart from crash also ? > No. Once I corrected the startup issues (which turned out to be a typo in the commandline arguments), the kernel started up fine (I did not test further than mounting the root fs). cu Michael