On 08/05/2013 02:26 PM, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
On Mon, 05 Aug 2013 12:48:25 -0600 Stephen Warren swarren@wwwdotorg.org wrote:
On 08/05/2013 12:39 PM, Stephen Warren wrote: ...
Note that I'm also in the process of pushing a project to github that creates a few boot.scr that fit into this model. I've written the code, and hope to have IP approval to upload it very soon. Aside from the example above, it also supports netboot, initrd being optional, hard-coding various extra stuff into bootargs, etc.
Oh, that was quick - I got IP approval, and it's pushed to: https://github.com/NVIDIA/tegra-uboot-scripts
very interesting to see.
It's not directly relevant to this thread, but the scripts to flash U-Boot onto a Tegra device are also at:
https://github.com/NVIDIA/tegra-uboot-flasher-scripts/blob/master/README-use...
nice, i will look at getting these packaged up and included in fedora.
Note that I haven't put a huge amount of thought into distro packaging for the tool set. The usage model of the tools is:
1) Sync the source 2) Build the U-Boot/DTB/BCT/flash-image binaries 3) Run another command to flash them
I assume that a distro package would run (1) and (2) to generate the package, and the user would then install the package and run (3). Doing anything else would mean an odd model w.r.t. the use of "repo" to pull in multiple git repos into the source tree, or the package would end up being nothing more than a copy of the source tree that a developer would sync. Hence, the package would include some specific version of the U-Boot binary/binaries.
So, I'm not 100% sure if it's a good model to package it up? Perhaps it'd make sense...
If do you package it up, please make sure to package U-Boot v2013.07 and nothing later at the moment (you'll need to manually adjust the version of u-boot.git that gets sync'd during the package build process), since the very latest version of u-boot/master doesn't boot on Tegra, due to a bug that will hopefully be fixed in the next couple of days.