On Wed, 10 Nov 2010 22:28:29 +0100 Wolfgang Denk <w...@denx.de> wrote:
> Well, see above. You are argumenting from a low-level, implementation > point of view. For the end user this is not transparent at all. He > just runs a single "make foo_config" and a single "make all". The end > user sees and thinks of just a single configuration and a single build > he is running. Well, from the user's perspective hopefully they just build it and it all works. :-) I think this is a question of internals. > > Parallel builds should work fine. It would be a separate autoconf.mk > > file somewhere under nand_spl, not rewriting the same file multiple > > times during the build process. > > Oh... this is another thing I did not grasp yet. But then, how would > it become active for "common" code parts? Anything in the top-level makefile would get the main u-boot image's config. Common parts such as config.mk operate in the context they're included into -- they're already separately included into the SPL makefile. It looks like there are a few uses of CONFIG_SYS_TEXT_BASE in the toplevel makefile for constructing things like u-boot.img. We don't do that for NAND; if we wanted to, and had a separate autoconf.mk, we'd want to move the final u-boot-nand image assembly into the SPL makefile. -Scott _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
