On 17:28 Tue 24 Sep , Sascha Hauer wrote: > On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 02:44:42PM +0200, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote: > > On 11:33 Tue 24 Sep , Sascha Hauer wrote: > > > On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 11:24:50AM +0200, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote: > > > > On 09:32 Tue 24 Sep , Sascha Hauer wrote: > > > > > Some typos inside > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, Sep 21, 2013 at 04:54:16PM +0200, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote: > > > > > > Simple update file format developped for Somfy, tools and library are > > > > > > > > > > s/developped/developed/ > > > > > > > > > > > +/* > > > > > > + * Copyright (c) 2013 Jean-Chritstophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <plagnioj@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > > > > > s/Jean-Chritstophe/Jean-Christophe/ > > > > > > > > a tyPo in my own name :( > > > > > > > > > > Otherwise this looks good. > > > > > > > > for some times I was thinking to do the same on uimage > > > > > > > > so we do not need to extract struff from it > > > > > > I have a patch that drops multifile uImage support. It really makes the > > > bootm code more readable. > > > > NO I does use it and in production board > > > > we must have multifile uImage support > > That was in response to "I was thinking to do the same on uimage" which > I interpreted in the way that you thought about implementing uimage > support as filesystem which would allow us to remove the multifile > support from bootm without loosing the feature of handling multifile > images. yes I was thinking of droping all the bootm uImage bla bla code and use an ioctl to get the metadata and I do agree this will simplify the bootm code Best Regards, J. > > Sascha > > -- > Pengutronix e.K. | | > Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | > Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 | > Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 | _______________________________________________ barebox mailing list barebox@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox
