Re: [U-Boot] [STATUS: AT91/AVR32]

2011-02-08 Thread Uli Raich
Dear Reinhard, Point 1: taken and, as you can see, already improved upon Point 2: I did not know the new configuration procedure even though I had seen the boards.cfg file. The description in the README file is outdated. I tried to compile the at91sam9260ek_nandflash version with success but fail

Re: [U-Boot] [STATUS: AT91/AVR32]

2011-02-08 Thread Andreas Bießmann
Dear Jens Scharsig, Am 08.02.2011 um 22:11 schrieb Jens Scharsig: > Am 08.02.2011 16:35, schrieb Reinhard Meyer: >> Hello AT91/AVR32 users and maintainers, >> >> since relocation was introduced most ARM boards and therefore all AT91 based >> boards are >> inherently broken. >> >> We also used

Re: [U-Boot] [STATUS: AT91/AVR32]

2011-02-08 Thread Jens Scharsig
Am 08.02.2011 16:35, schrieb Reinhard Meyer: > Hello AT91/AVR32 users and maintainers, > > since relocation was introduced most ARM boards and therefore all AT91 based > boards are > inherently broken. > > We also used this "opportunity" to rework most of the AT91 include files mess. > > You ca

Re: [U-Boot] [STATUS: AT91/AVR32]

2011-02-08 Thread Remy Bohmer
Hi Reinhard, 2011/2/8 Reinhard Meyer : > Dear Uli Raich, >> Dear Reinhard, >> Many thanks for your answer. Only... I do not find a at91sam9260ek in this >> Makefile. I find at91sam9261ek or  at91sam92603ek though. >> Will try the at91sam92603ek config. >> Uli > 1. please *always* reply to the lis

Re: [U-Boot] [STATUS: AT91/AVR32]

2011-02-08 Thread Reinhard Meyer
Dear Uli Raich, > Dear Reinhard, > Many thanks for your answer. Only... I do not find a at91sam9260ek in this > Makefile. I find at91sam9261ek or at91sam92603ek though. > Will try the at91sam92603ek config. > Uli 1. please *always* reply to the list as well 2. Makefile is not relevant for new/fi