On Sat, 02 Feb 2008 22:25:54 +0100 Stelian Pop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Le samedi 02 février 2008 à 06:59 +0100, Stefan Roese a écrit : > > > > I did think of that. I have no strong feeling about that. Except that if > > > we put at91cap9adk under board/atmel, at91rm9200dk should go there too. > > > > Right. I always prefer to "collect" board ports from one manufacturer/brand > > into a specific directory. > > Manufacturer or brand/type ? Meaning, what do we do with the other AT91 > based boards, which are not made by Atmel (cmc_pu2, csb637, kb9202, > mp2usb) ? I think they should be collected according to board manufacturer or brand, not cpu type. So boards/atmel is for boards manufactured by Atmel, not all boards that happen to have an Atmel cpu on them. Or at least that's what appears to be the current practice. Haavard ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ U-Boot-Users mailing list U-Boot-Users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/u-boot-users
