On 11/28/2012 2:35 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
Dear Troy Kisky,
In message <50b67c99.8080...@boundarydevices.com> you wrote:
But the reason I didn't include common.h is because of the target specific
files that it also includes. Would you mind if I moved
Why would these hurt? They don't anywhere else.
I'm not saying that including common.h wouldn't work.
I'm saying that it seems wrong to include target specific include
files in an executable that should generate the same code regardless
of the target selected.
I really don't care enough to argue. I just want you to understand why
I did it the way I did. It wasn't because I was crazy, or lazy. We just
hold different priorities.
Would you like to see the Linux way of ALIGN, or ROUND?
Now, back to the other topic you raised. Should I apply the bug work-around
for all version 2 headers, or find a way to distinguish mx53/mx6?
Thanks
Troy
_______________________________________________
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
