[U-Boot-Users] Breakage of board ports on new features.
galak at kernel.crashing.org
Tue Dec 5 15:23:47 CET 2006
On Dec 4, 2006, at 11:32 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> In message <45750057.3030400 at orkun.us> you wrote:
>> What I am saying is that you should rename existing CONFIG_MPC8349 to
>> CONFIG_MPC834X and only on the boards that actually use 8349
>> define the
>> CONFIG_MPC8349 (in addition, not in lieu of). Of course other boards
>> using other member (8343, 8347) need to have their specific
>> CONFIG_MPC8343 and CONFIG_MPC8347 options defined appropriately as
>> (again in addition to CONFIG_MPC834X). It is better to do this
>> while the
>> number of boards is small.
>> Anyway, I just pointed to the existing practice in U-Boot. In the
>> it's probably Wolfgang's decision as U-Boot project leader.
> You said exactly what I had in mind. Just much better.
Ok, but I think the several of the boards are capable of running with
all flavors of MPC834x what do we do for them? I know the MDS is and
I'm questing TQM834x is as well?
I understand the desire, I just feel that it doesn't add anything
because we've done a decent job of making the differences between
them covered by feature configs.
More information about the U-Boot