Thanks, Alec, One other thought I had was that it would be nice to support a "tftp prefix", e.g. "setenv tftp_prefix roach2/", so that macros that tftp a file could request "${tftp_prefix}filename" instead of just "filename". Note that I showed a '/' in tftp_prefix, but it need not be a directory separator (e.g. "tftp_prefix=roach2-" would work too).
This would make it easier to have one tftp server handle both roach1 and roach2 boards. Dave On Nov 15, 2012, at 11:59 PM, Alec Rust wrote: > Good plan David, will do. There are some more updates so I will release this > with the new round. > > On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 1:53 AM, David MacMahon <dav...@astro.berkeley.edu> > wrote: > Hi, Alec, > > Thanks for the updates! > > On Oct 25, 2012, at 7:55 AM, Alec Rust wrote: > > > To program the new u-boot (NB! choose the correct binary for your revision > > of R2, programming the wrong binary will cause the board to switch itself > > off at boot, and fixing that requires soldering on the board): > > 1. Set up a tftp and dhcp server (see the tftp section in the test machine > > setup instructions). > > 2. Create a symlink or rename the u-boot binary to "u-boot.bin" e.g. "ln -s > > u-boot-r2-rev1.bin u-boot.bin" in the tftp directory. > > I'd like to suggest making the tftpuboot "command" use the explicitly named > file (e.g. u-boot-r2-rev1.bin) rather than having to create a generically > named "u-boot.bin" symlink to it. The u-boot binary already differs between > board revisions so using different filenames doesn't seem like it would add > much complication on the build side (though maybe it would?). It would > greatly simplify the user side by being able to update u-boot on different > revisions of ROACH2 without having to go through the error-prone (i.e. > forgot-to-change-it-prone) manual step of checking/updating the symlink. > > Is that possible/reasonable? > > Thanks, > Dave > >