I get it now! Sorry for the confusion. Perhaps, I will try one day - there was another guy who nicely offered me to do some testing, but we didn't make the deal. To be honest, my objective would be to get rid of u-boot (barebox) or any middle stack. Right now, for the Touch Book, I'm setting up three times the pins and the environment: x-load, u-boot, linux-omap. That's crazy! And u-boot doesn't bring anything to the user except an early splashscreen. There was an interesting work made by a guy three months ago about integrating everything up into the kernel. No x-load, no u-boot, no barebox. If I had time, it's something that I would investigate. Simplification at the extreme, removing all duplicate stack and programs, pushing everything up to the kernel. I don't know if there any barebox work about such strategy... GrÃgoire On Fri, 2010-11-26 at 10:16 +0100, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote: > Hi, > > I think you niss understand the ml this is barebox not linux-omap > > Best Regards, > J. > On 10:44 Thu 25 Nov , Gregoire Gentil wrote: > > Sorry for the late answer. I'm not sure to have followed the whole > > thread of this email. > > > > The Touch Book is an OMAP-based device. > > > > We sent to the mailing list some patches a while ago and we will update > > those patches next month to the linux-omap mailing list. > > > > Also, touchbook has its own CONFIG and own board file. It should not be > > present in the beagleboard board file, > > > > > > GrÃgoire > > > > > > On Mon, 2010-11-22 at 14:26 +0100, Uwe Kleine-KÃnig wrote: > > > Halli JÃrgen, > > > > > > > > + if (machine_is_touchbook()) > > > > > > > > Where does the machine_is_touchbook() comes from? > > > arch/arm/tools/mach-types + arch/arm/tools/gen-mach-types I guess. > > > > > > Best regards > > > Uwe > > > > > _______________________________________________ barebox mailing list barebox@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox
