On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 09:35:56PM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote: > On Mon, 23 Jun 2008 15:30:35 -0600 John Linn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I'll try to better understand if we can detect the compressed device > > tree and if we really have to disable the APU. > > > > What's the reasoning for being independent of the kernel, maybe it's > > obvious to everyone but me? > > The intention, as I understand it, is that the wrapper utilities can be > installed stand-alone and used to wrap other kernels if needs be. In > practice I've not seen this happen yet, as most PowerPC kernels > are built directly from the kernel source. Fedora does have a > separate package for the wrapper bits, but I'm not entirely sure it's > used. > > My understanding could be totally wrong, and if so I'll politely ask > Paul or anyone else to hit me with a cluebat :).
AFAIK, the reason is to be able to build multiple bootwrapper configurations around a single kernel image without multiple compiles of the wrapper bits, and to increase the amount of compile testing that all the wrapper bits are subjected to. (this way they get compiled on all PowerPC kernel compiles instead of just when they are needed for an obscure platform) g. _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
