Hi Mike, On Sat, Jan 14, 2012 at 5:27 PM, Simon Glass <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Mike, > > On Sat, Jan 14, 2012 at 5:22 PM, Mike Frysinger <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Saturday 14 January 2012 20:16:35 Simon Glass wrote: > >> On Sat, Jan 14, 2012 at 5:09 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote: > >> > On Thursday 12 January 2012 00:41:24 Simon Glass wrote: > >> >> Still don't quite get it though. For example, the beagle board > defines > >> >> show_boot_progress() but does not define CONFIG_SHOW_BOOT_PROGRESS, > so > >> >> wouldn't that break that board? > >> > > >> > that sounds like an odd-man-out that needs fixing rather than > allowing to > >> > live > >> > >> Fair enough. although I suspect there will be many. If I could > >> actually get a MAKEALL to run without producing 100s of broken boards > >> then it would be easier to do this sort of thing. At the moment it's > >> like looking for a needle in a haystack. My warnings series aimed to > >> improve things slightly, but I don't think others have these problems. > > > > that's fair. if it's a small # of boards, i'd prefer to migrate them. > if > > it's a lot more, we can punt for now (add to the TODO?) and add comments > to > > the code why we have these checks. > > OK, I don't know the answer to that but will try it out, and adjust > that patch as needed. > I have got back to this now - it seem that I can rely on the existing weak function, so I will do so. I only want to update two of the patches, so will just send those ones. The rest should be fine as is. Regards, SImon
_______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list [email protected] http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
