Subject: Re: U-Boot and kernel 2.6

From: Kenneth Johansson <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2004 18:48:59 +0200

On Fri, 2004-06-11 at 17:31, Mark Chambers wrote:
> > > Yeah, having the bi_recs interface actually working
> > > would be ideal, but at the present time nothing is
> > > working and as AFAIK no-one is working on it.
> >
> > So we should offer some gentle encouragement. Like refusing to accept
> > any further modifications to include/asm-ppc/ppcboot.h.
> >
>
> Here's another idea - how about XML?  That would be two steps forward, IMO,
> instead of just going from one magic structure to another.

Well XML of all things must be magic considering that it automatically
solves all problems all the time.

> As to just trashing bd_t, does that mean users have to upgrade their
> bootloader to use newer kernels, and could not switch back easily if
> problems arose?  Perhaps the kernel could identify whether the pointer is to
> a bd_t or something else and handle it automatically?

Don't worry this will never change the problem is not creating a big
enough itch so nobody will do anything (again).

** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/