[Buildroot] svn commit: trunk/buildroot/target/u-boot
ulf.samuelsson at atmel.com
Tue Jan 6 12:50:36 UTC 2009
mån 2009-01-05 klockan 21:12 +0100 skrev Peter Korsgaard:
> >>>>> "Ulf" == Ulf Samuelsson <ulf.samuelsson at atmel.com> writes:
> Ulf> The "complex" file name is needed, unless you only
> Ulf> work with a single board.
> I don't get it - Isn't that why we have binaries/<project>?
YOu copy things to binaries/PROJECT to have a single directory
which you can compress, but if you copy the stuff to
the tftp directory then you have a mess.
You have to manually rename this.
> Even so,
> isn't that the same problem with the other files? (file system images,
The kernel is already doing this in the "advanced" makefile.
The rootfs should be doing it. and in this case PROJECT Is definitely
the right one to use.
> Ulf> We obviously need to find a way that does not break the build of
> Ulf> course.
> Ulf> Many targets define BR2_BOARD_NAME in their Config.in's
> Ulf> and it may make sense to have a common BR2_BOARD_NAME
> Ulf> Then it will be always be defined.
> Ulf> Default to "uclibc" is probably OK.
> Isn't that what we have BR2_PROJECT for?
Yes and no,
You can use BR2_PROJECT, but if you:
when building u-boot-<VERSION>, it also makes sense to name the binary
because regardless of which project you are building,
the binary should end up the same.
<DATE> is there to give you some kind of revision information
so you do not overwrite older working results.
It is not perfect, but I think it is good enough.
If you are building several projects where the U-Boot differs
I.E: if a header file is first copied to "include/configs"
then it would make sense to call it:
The difference is minor, so I guess we go with PROJECT for now.
More information about the buildroot