Op 18 dec. 2011, om 21:27 heeft Bruce Ashfield het volgende geschreven: > On Sun, Dec 18, 2011 at 3:13 PM, Koen Kooi <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Op 18 dec. 2011, om 20:47 heeft Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov het volgende >> geschreven: >> >>> As per org.oe.dev and meta-oe's kernel.bbclass move uImage creation to >>> separate task from do_deploy. This way the do_install task can also >>> benefit from generated uImage. >>> >>> The only major feature of oe-core's version (not to recreate uImage >>> if it exists) is retained in this patch. >> >> I still don't agree with that behaviour. The in-kernel uImage code is just >> like the in-kernel defconfigs: useless for people who aren't kernel >> developers. > > In that case, shouldn't people doing u-boot development (or other > non-kernel developers), > be building a uImage via something that isn't in kernel.bbclass ?
I use the kernel.bbclass in meta-oe, that does what I need.
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
_______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
