Re: flash-kernel: arm64 doesn't have bootz

* Karsten Merker [2016-10-08 13:18]: > I think that keeping the platform-specific boot script generation > handled by flash-kernel is the more flexible approach. Generating a > compatibility boot script fragment within d-i during the > installation process means that this is a

Re: flash-kernel: arm64 doesn't have bootz

* Vagrant Cascadian [2016-07-30 17:14]: > At that point, we might want to look into some sort of templating; on > several of the platforms it could basically re-use most of > uboot-generic, by setting compatibility variables for the old > versions. > > With the recent odroid

Re: flash-kernel: arm64 doesn't have bootz

* Ian Campbell [2016-07-31 10:14]: > > Are all arm64 boards only going to support booti and not bootz? > > bootz refers to the zImage which is only an ARM image type and not an > ARM64 one, which is an Image and hence booti. And according to this email, all arm64 boards will

Re: flash-kernel: arm64 doesn't have bootz

On Sat, 2016-07-30 at 17:14 -0700, Vagrant Cascadian wrote: >  > Are all arm64 boards only going to support booti and not bootz? bootz refers to the zImage which is only an ARM image type and not an ARM64 one, which is an Image and hence booti. That would only change if someone added a

Re: flash-kernel: arm64 doesn't have bootz

On 2016-07-30, Martin Michlmayr wrote: > bootscript/all/bootscr.uboot-generic uses bootz but arm64 requires > booti. > > My idea was to copy bootscript/all/bootscr.uboot-generic to arm64 and > replace bootz with booti: > > sed "s/bootz/booti/" bootscript/all/bootscr.uboot-generic > >

flash-kernel: arm64 doesn't have bootz

bootscript/all/bootscr.uboot-generic uses bootz but arm64 requires booti. My idea was to copy bootscript/all/bootscr.uboot-generic to arm64 and replace bootz with booti: sed "s/bootz/booti/" bootscript/all/bootscr.uboot-generic > bootscript/arm64/bootscr.uboot-generic debian/rules copies all/*