[U-Boot] AT91: problems master vs. next

[Wolfgang Denk]

Dear Reinhard Meyer,

In message <4C98BEC7.9090500 at emk-elektronik.de> you wrote:
>
> should be switchable OFF by a configuration option. Who does need that
> relocation in the first place? For years ARM did work without it; why now
> blowing up the code?

Maintenancewise, the relocation is needed to allow to merge the ARM
code back into a common source tree with other architectures.

Technically, it is needed to be able to run a single U-Boot binary
image on systems where you don;t know the exact RAM size at compile
time (say on boards that come with more than one RAM size
configurations), or to dynamically adapt to things like PRAM, frame
buffer memory, syslog buffer, etc.

Yes, ARM kind of worked without that for years, but it has always been
a PITA for many of us.

Best regards,

Wolfgang Denk

-- 
DENX Software Engineering GmbH,     MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: wd at denx.de
The rule on staying alive as a program manager is to give 'em a  num-
ber or give 'em a date, but never give 'em both at once.