Hi Marek,
On 11/02/2014 14:15, Marek Vasut wrote:
On Thursday, January 16, 2014 at 11:14:44 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
Dear Otavio Salvador,
In message 1389909486-12880-1-git-send-email-otavio@ossystems.com.br you
wrote:
This patchset does as stated in the subject. It has been build tested
as can be seen below:
What is the motivation for this change? Using zImage is - from the technical point of view - the poorest of the available choices. If you are not happy with using uImages, then why do you not move forward and use FIT images?
I see the patchset was applied, but this question was not answered.
I have not seen the question, sorry. Rather patchwork did not show me the right thread, as it showed me only the comments for Patches 1-11 :-(
Anyway, I think the discussion is a bit away from which is the best image. IMHO the board maintainer can decide which is the more suitable default environment he needs, and in this case, he decided for a "raw image" like zimage. We can argument which is the best one as on the ARM ML, but I have no other arguments to block such kind of patches.
I am missing Simon's patches to move the "default" environment outside of the configuration file: I can imagine that using different ".env" can solve part of the problems we have with CONFIG_EXTRA_ENV_SETTINGS, that is become more and more complex, and can help to fine tuning the default environment.
Best regards, Stefano Babic