Hi Heiko,
On Tue, 09 Apr 2013 15:17:02 +0200, Heiko Schocher hs@denx.de wrote:
Hello Albert,
on 09.04.2013 14:42, wrote Albert ARIBAUD:
Hi Heiko,
On Tue, 09 Apr 2013 14:11:38 +0200, Heiko Schocher hs@denx.de wrote:
Let us assume I keep 12K. Here is a current build of cam_enc_4xx:
text data bss dec hex filename 439526 13148 311092 763766 ba776 ./u-boot 9073 840 500 10413 28ad ./spl/u-boot-spl
[...]
Would that be ok?
Yes, that seems good to me, but I could not test it ...
I can do a diff of the binaries with and without the patch -- normally, they should be the same except for the U-Boot version identification. Would that do?
Yes. I did this too, and see only a diff for the version string.
Thanks -- I've staged the 10K+2K change for V2.
(But not forget to commit your change first, else the "-dirty" in the version string will insert an offset ;-)
I actually keep a 'fake_build' branch with a single nifty commit on it that makes almost all version information sources constant (only mkimage resists as it collects the current date and time programmatically, but that's ok, I don't aim for 100% faking.
So, whenever I need to do bulk comparisons, I add this commit above the two branches to be compared, and two batch builds later, I can compare the .bins, even if different commit ID and/or local changes are involved. :)
bye, Heiko
Amicalement,