From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jos=E9_Miguel_Gon=E7alves?= <jose.goncalves@inov.pt>
Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2012 17:58:06 +0100
Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH v4 10/11] Add u-boot-pad.bin target to the
	Makefile
In-Reply-To: <1348071053.22800.1@snotra>
References: <1348071053.22800.1@snotra>
Message-ID: <5059F99E.6030004@inov.pt>
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 19-09-2012 17:10, Scott Wood wrote:
> On 09/19/2012 06:25:26 AM, Jos? Miguel Gon?alves wrote:
>> Samsung's S3C24XX SoCs need this in order to generate a binary image
>> with a padded SPL concatenated with U-Boot.
>
> I still think "pad" is a lousy name for this.  It refers to a minor 
> implementation detail of how the image was put together.
>
> If you don't like the suggestions in 
> http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2012-September/134191.html, how about
> "u-boot-with-spl.bin"?

I used a suggestion made by Christian Riesch and accepted by Tom Rini.

I'm totally cool with any name that the U-Boot core maintainers would like to use, 
though I would prefer a shorter name than "u-boot-with-spl.bin" because I'm lazy 
and don't like to type too many keys when I upgrade by tftp :-) Because of that I 
think I would prefer "u-boot-all.bin". So, everybody agrees with that name?

Best regards,
Jos? Gon?alves