On 13:54 Sun 03 Feb , Haavard Skinnemoen wrote: > 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.
I agree too, they should be collected according to board manufacturer not cpu type. Best Regards, J. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
