On Fri, May 28, 2010 at 04:52:32PM -0400, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote: > Thanks for the perspective, Lennart. Currently, u-boot isn't in debian > at all, yet i need it to boot my guruplug. so i'd like to see that > situation improve, but i'm not sure the best way to do it. > > I see a few possibilities: > > * package the u-boot sources and make a single u-boot-installer image > that makes it easy for debian folks to build their own flavor of u-boot. > in that case, maybe a "u-boot-install" utility (by analogy with > grub-install?) would actually compile the code as needed and then move > it into place. > > * package u-boot, but only add specific binary packages as requested. > that is: one source package, and initially maybe only 1 binary package > (for the guruplug, since i'm the one requesting ;) ). add more packages > as people want them? > > * Make a separate u-boot source package following each of the main > architecture custodians' "forks", and have each source package create > separate binary packages for the various sub-arch targets. > > What do folks think would be reasonable?
To some extent uboot is a bit like a PC BIOS. It really shouldn't ever require an update. Of course it is also a boot loader, which might require updates. It's tricky. Compiling on the target could be a pain. Not everyone wants to install a compiler on a slow target. Now using the source package on a fast PC and building the target package there and using it might work. Of course given uboot has to be flashed to update, and not just installed as a debian package, to some extent the binary doesn't even gain anything from being in a debian package. -- Len Sorensen -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-arm-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100528205833.gf17...@caffeine.csclub.uwaterloo.ca
