2014-08-21 15:51 GMT+04:00 Andreas Färber <afaerber@suse.de>:
I think it would be best to handle non upstream u-boot boards separately and only keep upstream boards in u-boot from Base:System. What do you think about that?
+1
Then we would be able to keep different specific versions of u-boot, but this should be an exception but not the rule. So the final goal is to have nice upstream u-boot (as well as the linux kernel).
We already have a Contrib:sunxi, where we could place it. In v2014.07 however, only Cubietruck was present, not Cubieboard and Cubieboard2,
Cubietruck is the newest version AFAIK.
I reworked our EXT2 support for MLO (SPL for OMAP) to ease upstreaming. I based my work on Matwey update (2014.10-rc1). See: https://build.opensuse.org/project/monitor/home:Guillaume_G:branches:Base:Sy...
About v2014.10-rc1 I'm more doubtful. To build JeOS images, we need to submit u-boot to Factory, so Base:System and Factory(:ARM) will be pretty much the same all the time. So I'm thinking it may make sense to update Base:System to the latest stable only, which still is v2014.07, and do the v2014.10-rc1 in, e.g., devel:ARM:Factory. If we put the resulting u-boot on an SD card it is less of a problem if something in the -rc breaks; but for flashing U-Boot, bricking the device is a risk. So I see this similar to keeping Kernel:HEAD separate from Factory.
I did -rc just because I am so slow and thought that 2014.10 will be released to the moment when I will have sorted the patches.
Last time I checked, there was no real OpenOCD package in OBS (only some old one in a home:), and it requires JTAG hardware, connectors on the board and config files matching the board.
https://build.opensuse.org/package/show/openSUSE:Factory/openocd -- With best regards, Matwey V. Kornilov http://blog.matwey.name xmpp://0x2207@jabber.ru -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-arm+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-arm+owner@opensuse.org