>> I would prefer more testing over user/developer compability. >Yes. I don't feel good about merging something which no boards use by >default. >> But if you resize the partition for u-boot be sure to resize to 256k >and >> not 192k, since this would cause a lot more problems than needed for >us >> using flash chips with 128k block size. Not a big problem but an >issue. > >I'm talking about changing the partitioning specifically on ATSTK1000. >Other boards can do whatever they want. But it may be a good idea to >reserve 256k anyway since it becomes less likely that we'll have to do >the same thing all over again in the future.
But making it more likely to have equal partitions makes it easier to test kernels on different boards for debugging. I use my kernel on both the stk1000 and my own custom board. Then again no big deal but makes compliance/testing easier. ... > >I have to say I was a bit surprised by the size of the NAND code >though. The LCD code is sort of excused since it sucks in a big >uncompressed logo... Is there any plans for supporting the UBI/UBIFS, or is it planned? ( prob. not but yes it is large, but too large? ) >> I would love to see USB support implemented. > >Yeah...maybe I shouldn't have said that ;-) It would be cool to be able >to run console over USB, but I don't know if U-Boot has any USB gadget >support...so it might take a while to implement. I think besides a usb core there is not much useful released relating to gadget drivers at least. No, pressure :) > >Haavard Eirik Aa _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
