| Message ID | 1465075749-31837-1-git-send-email-ezequiel@vanguardiasur.com.ar |
|---|---|
| State | Rejected |
| Headers | show |
Hello, On Sat, 4 Jun 2016 18:29:08 -0300, Ezequiel Garcia wrote: > There's no reason to use a specific U-Boot version, given > we are using upstream. Leave the default version get selected. > > Signed-off-by: Ezequiel Garcia <ezequiel@vanguardiasur.com.ar> No, that's not our policy. Our policy is to use a fixed version (even if an upstream one) to make sure that people using the defconfig in the future will have a known-working version. Thomas
Thomas, Ezequiel, All, On 2016-06-05 09:52 +0200, Thomas Petazzoni spake thusly: > On Sat, 4 Jun 2016 18:29:08 -0300, Ezequiel Garcia wrote: > > There's no reason to use a specific U-Boot version, given > > we are using upstream. Leave the default version get selected. > > > > Signed-off-by: Ezequiel Garcia <ezequiel@vanguardiasur.com.ar> > > No, that's not our policy. Our policy is to use a fixed version (even > if an upstream one) to make sure that people using the defconfig in the > future will have a known-working version. That may be my fault: we've discussed this with Ezequiel on IRC, and from what I understood, it looked he was askign why we were not using an upstream version. So, I replied that we can use upstream, of course, if upstream has the necessary support. Maybe I was not clear enough: we can use upstream, but a fixed version, of course. If 2013.10 is too old, you can bump (e.g. to 2015.10 or whatever, even a sha1 from the git tree if necessary). But that should be a fixed version, indeed. Sorry for the confusion... :-/ Regards, Yann E. MORIN.
On 5 June 2016 at 18:54, Yann E. MORIN <yann.morin.1998@free.fr> wrote: > Thomas, Ezequiel, All, > > On 2016-06-05 09:52 +0200, Thomas Petazzoni spake thusly: >> On Sat, 4 Jun 2016 18:29:08 -0300, Ezequiel Garcia wrote: >> > There's no reason to use a specific U-Boot version, given >> > we are using upstream. Leave the default version get selected. >> > >> > Signed-off-by: Ezequiel Garcia <ezequiel@vanguardiasur.com.ar> >> >> No, that's not our policy. Our policy is to use a fixed version (even >> if an upstream one) to make sure that people using the defconfig in the >> future will have a known-working version. > > That may be my fault: we've discussed this with Ezequiel on IRC, and > from what I understood, it looked he was askign why we were not using an > upstream version. > > So, I replied that we can use upstream, of course, if upstream has the > necessary support. > > Maybe I was not clear enough: we can use upstream, but a fixed version, > of course. > > If 2013.10 is too old, you can bump (e.g. to 2015.10 or whatever, even a > sha1 from the git tree if necessary). But that should be a fixed > version, indeed. > > Sorry for the confusion... :-/ > No problem, no need for apologies :-) I'll cook a new patch in no time.
diff --git a/configs/beaglebone_defconfig b/configs/beaglebone_defconfig index be803b9cce30..b9d78a9fb25b 100644 --- a/configs/beaglebone_defconfig +++ b/configs/beaglebone_defconfig @@ -20,8 +20,6 @@ BR2_PACKAGE_HOST_LINUX_HEADERS_CUSTOM_3_12=y # bootloader BR2_TARGET_UBOOT=y BR2_TARGET_UBOOT_BOARDNAME="am335x_evm" -BR2_TARGET_UBOOT_CUSTOM_VERSION=y -BR2_TARGET_UBOOT_CUSTOM_VERSION_VALUE="2013.10" BR2_TARGET_UBOOT_FORMAT_IMG=y BR2_TARGET_UBOOT_SPL=y BR2_TARGET_UBOOT_SPL_NAME="MLO"
There's no reason to use a specific U-Boot version, given we are using upstream. Leave the default version get selected. Signed-off-by: Ezequiel Garcia <ezequiel@vanguardiasur.com.ar> --- configs/beaglebone_defconfig | 2 -- 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)