On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 1:37 AM, Albert ARIBAUD <albert.u.b...@aribaud.net> wrote: > Hi Tom, > > (seems like gmail does not honor the rule that replies should drop the > "(was: xxxxx)" part in an e-mail subject; but hey, neither does Claws > apparently. Sigh.) > > On Sat, 13 Oct 2012 08:17:41 -0700, Tom Rini <tr...@ti.com> wrote: > >> On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 3:11 AM, Albert ARIBAUD >> <albert.u.b...@aribaud.net> wrote: >> > Hi Tom, >> > >> > On Thu, 11 Oct 2012 16:15:02 -0700, Tom Rini <tr...@ti.com> wrote: >> > >> >> On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 12:27:09AM +0200, stefano babic wrote: >> >> >> >> [snip] >> >> > One reason to move into the board directory is that there was a decision >> >> > to move rules related to only one arch or SOC where they belong to, that >> >> > is in the corresponding arch/ or board/ directory. >> >> >> >> I'll admit that maybe my make-fu is off, but that idea doesn't work, at >> >> least for SPL. So I'd really like someone to make that work first. >> > >> > Tom, can you be more specific than 'it doesn't work'? :) >> > >> > Seriously, though, I'm interested in understand what the make issue is >> > there, because I am indeed a proponent of putting files where they >> > belong to, so if help is needed there, I would try to. >> >> I have had no luck moving things like the 'MLO' rule from spl/Makefile >> to anywhere else. Same with the 'checkthumb' rule in the top-level >> Makefile. > > Ok, now it is more precise :) but still not enough for me to > efficiently try and analyze the issue. > > Let's take the checkthumb rule. Where did you try to move it?
I tried both arch/arm/config.mk arch/arm/Makefile and couldn't make either work. -- Tom _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
