> I wonder if we need to make it warn about missing functionality if
someone is using the old option though?
Agreed, will do that in V2.
//Ming Liu
於 2019年5月16日 週四 下午12:55寫道：
> On Thu, 2019-05-16 at 10:56 +0200, Ming Liu wrote:
> > Hi, Richard:
> >
> > > I'd imagine the code is designed so you
On Thu, 2019-05-16 at 10:56 +0200, Ming Liu wrote:
> Hi, Richard:
>
> > I'd imagine the code is designed so you'd inherit uboot-config in
> the machine and this therefore could be made to work as is.
>
> Yes, that probably is how the author intended it to be used, but
> unfortunately, that's not
Hi, Richard:
> I'd imagine the code is designed so you'd inherit uboot-config in the
machine and this therefore could be made to work as is.
Yes, that probably is how the author intended it to be used, but
unfortunately, that's not how it's being used in BSP layers, that fact is,
in most BSP meta
On Wed, 2019-05-15 at 21:22 +0200, liu.min...@gmail.com wrote:
> From: Ming Liu
>
> The code dealing with IMAGE_FSTYPES in uboot-config.bbclass would not
> take any effect since it's in a uboot particular class, but it's not
> being inherited by any image recipes.
>
> Move the IMAGE_FSTYPES hand
From: Ming Liu
The code dealing with IMAGE_FSTYPES in uboot-config.bbclass would not
take any effect since it's in a uboot particular class, but it's not
being inherited by any image recipes.
Move the IMAGE_FSTYPES handling part to image.bbclass would make it
really work.
Also drop some trivial
