[U-Boot] [x-loader] Re: [ANNOUNCE] Public x-loader git tree

[Nishanth Menon <nm@ti.com>]

Wolfgang Denk had written, on 12/16/2010 02:38 PM, the following:
> Dear Anand,
> 
> In message <AANLkTinHGBBJ_MO=bk2wcHjwMNuti62UACJYNaBenf3j@mail.gmail.com> you wrote:
>> To this end, we have set up an x-loader git tree on gitorious, and
>> seeded it with Steve Sakoman's x-loader tree [1] as of 15 December
>> 2010. (Thanks Steve for unifying so much of the forked code, and
>> getting rid of the dependency on u-boot, and more!).
> ...
>> Deva and I have volunteered to maintain the x-loader code - everyone
>> is welcome to contribute and help make it better.
>> (This is our first attempt at maintaining a software project - so any
>> help is appreciated).
> 
> May I ask what your goal is for such a project?
> 
> You mentioned that x-loader was derived from U-Boot, and shares some
> code.  What is the benefit from maintaining it as a separate project?
> 
> You write "getting rid of the dependency on u-boot", and try to make
> this sound as an advantage.  Is this really the case? Or did you just
> cut off your feed from upstream?
The statement was more in-terms of some ghastly ln -s 
../../../u-boot/include/asm/mux.h kind of stuff which existed in 
x-loader previously, practically making build of x-loader requiring that 
u-boot source be in the same location as the x-loader. yeah, it was 
atrocious, and is one of the steps of breaking that dependency that took 
place.

> 
> Would it not make more sense to merge it into the U-Boot tree, so it
> gets maintained as one project, and code is automatically kept in
> sync?
My 2 cents:
The eventual long term goal is to make u-boot/other alternatives (such 
as OMAP configuration header[1][2]) capable of replacing x-loader. We 
have much to do to reach that stage(while we work on it in parallel).
in the meanwhile, current xfurcation (since there are more than 5 or 6 
different known forks at least) make it impossible to do where we stand 
and what needs to be done.

In a way, considering a single x-loader as a standin solution while a 
final alternative evolves and becomes practical is important and is an 
evolutionary step IMHO.

Ref:
[1] 
https://gforge.ti.com/gf/download/docmanfileversion/229/3870/linux-without-a-bootloader.ppt
[2] 
http://nishanthmenon.blogspot.com/2009/05/configuration-header-no-more-x-loader.html
-- 
Regards,
Nishanth Menon