On Wednesday 16 May 2012 10:25:26 Wolfgang Denk wrote: > Dear Charles, > > In message <201205161007.59560.mannin...@actrix.gen.nz> you wrote: > > On Tuesday 15 May 2012 17:12:05 Mike Frysinger wrote: > > ... > > > > current u-boot policy is to not introduce changes that knowingly break > > > other platforms. so if you want to update the common arm config.mk, > > > you need to at least compile test all arm boards. > > ---------------------^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > > Doesn't that makes it an impossible task? Not having all the boards makes > > it pretty hard to test them all. > > A compile test does not require any actual hardware.
Does the patch fail I submitted fail any compile tests? AFAIK, it compiles but the resulting binary might just be rubbish on some boards. It worked fine on my overo board without any changes to the overo lds. I have just verified that it builds on overo mx51evk davinci_sonata If there is an expectation to build every possible config is there a script that will do that? > > > > other arches are using both fine, so it isn't a problem of common code. > > > > I might be incorrect, but I have noticed what appears to be some > > differences between different versions of binutils. > > Please be more specific. The same "different versions of binutils" > appear to work fine on other architectures ? That was based on some observations a year or two ago. I don't know if the problem has now gone away and have no way of reproducing it. -- Charles _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
