From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Jerry Van Baren <gerald.vanbaren@ge.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2007 07:38:06 -0500
Subject: [U-Boot-Users] RFC: New U-boot image format
In-Reply-To: <20071211222320.B7DB1246C2@gemini.denx.de>
References: <20071211222320.B7DB1246C2@gemini.denx.de>
Message-ID: <475FD62E.6020304@ge.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

Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> In message <475EE3AE.6060102@ge.com> you wrote:

[snip]

>>> 				os type, cpu architecture properties
>>> 				data load address
>>> 				entry points for executable images
>>>
>>> 	  Note: the above list is considered *draft* and open to discussion
>> Which properties are new inventions?  Data compression, timestamps, OS 
>> Type, CPU arch, data load address, and entry point?  Not a bad thing, 
>> just trying to understand how much we are extending.
> 
> All of this already exists, but in a static way.
> 
> New is: ability to chose checksum method; ability to compine  several
> blobs into one image in a structured way, so building and booting the
> equivalent  of  a  multifile  image  with  any combination of kernel,
> ramdisk and dtb blobs can be done in a clean way.

Ahh, my question wasn't clear.  The intended question was, which of 
these properties are new OF (IEEE-1275) or "existing linux kernel" 
*properties* (I didn't intend to ask which are new capabilities).

For instance, how to specify an address already exists, obviously, but I 
suspect a property "data load address" is new.

The intent behind the question was thinking about how big of a 
documentation job this will be.

[snip]

> Best regards,
> 
> Wolfgang Denk

Thanks,
gvb