On Saturday 14 January 2012 20:16:35 Simon Glass wrote: > On Sat, Jan 14, 2012 at 5:09 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote: > > On Thursday 12 January 2012 00:41:24 Simon Glass wrote: > >> Still don't quite get it though. For example, the beagle board defines > >> show_boot_progress() but does not define CONFIG_SHOW_BOOT_PROGRESS, so > >> wouldn't that break that board? > > > > that sounds like an odd-man-out that needs fixing rather than allowing to > > live > > Fair enough. although I suspect there will be many. If I could > actually get a MAKEALL to run without producing 100s of broken boards > then it would be easier to do this sort of thing. At the moment it's > like looking for a needle in a haystack. My warnings series aimed to > improve things slightly, but I don't think others have these problems.
that's fair. if it's a small # of boards, i'd prefer to migrate them. if it's a lot more, we can punt for now (add to the TODO?) and add comments to the code why we have these checks. -mike
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
