On Mon, Dec 20, 2010, Clint Adams wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 11:47:39AM +0100, Loïc Minier wrote:
> > ATM you actually do have to install the u-boot package for the
> > "mkimage" command; I think this command should definitely be split out.
>
> Would it make sense to have a u-boot-tools pa
On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 11:47:39AM +0100, Loïc Minier wrote:
> ATM you actually do have to install the u-boot package for the
> "mkimage" command; I think this command should definitely be split out.
Would it make sense to have a u-boot-tools package with some of
the other tools in it?
--
To
On Mon, Dec 20, 2010, Marek Vasut wrote:
> This is split out before and was merged into the u-boot package for
> some strange reason ... anyway, what you are proposing is something I
> already tried to propose this summer and I was chased away by Clint. I
> even had the patch for the package ready,
On Monday 20 December 2010 11:47:39 Loïc Minier wrote:
> Hey
>
> On Tue, Aug 31, 2010, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> > I think it's a bad idea as the Packages file will grow a lot. If you
> > don't have enough disk space to install the package, then don't - you
> > don't have to anyway. You
Hey
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> I think it's a bad idea as the Packages file will grow a lot. If you
> don't have enough disk space to install the package, then don't - you
> don't have to anyway. You can simply download and extract the .deb to
> get the binary you wa
On Mon, Aug 30, 2010, Clint Adams wrote:
> I do not think this is a good idea. Does anyone else agree with Marek?
I don't think it's a good idea either; in Linaro, we introduced an
u-boot-linaro source which has tons of binary packages, but it's full
of ugly names and it's too many packages fo
Dne Út 31. srpna 2010 01:42:56 Martin Michlmayr napsal(a):
> * Clint Adams [2010-08-30 23:25]:
> > > Create binary package for each supported machine instead of for each
> > > architecture. This should allow adding more devices without creating
> > > bloated packages.
> >
> > I do not think this
* Clint Adams [2010-08-30 23:25]:
> > Create binary package for each supported machine instead of for each
> > architecture. This should allow adding more devices without creating bloated
> > packages.
> I do not think this is a good idea. Does anyone else agree with Marek?
I think it's a bad id
On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 11:04:31PM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> Create binary package for each supported machine instead of for each
> architecture. This should allow adding more devices without creating bloated
> packages.
I do not think this is a good idea. Does anyone else agree with Marek?
Package: u-boot
Severity: wishlist
Create binary package for each supported machine instead of for each
architecture. This should allow adding more devices without creating bloated
packages.
-- System Information:
Debian Release: squeeze/sid
APT prefers testing
APT policy: (900, 'testing'), (
10 matches
Mail list logo
