On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 8:26 AM, Daiane Angolini <[email protected]> wrote: > On 04/19/2013 05:03 AM, Eric Bénard wrote: >> >> Le Thu, 18 Apr 2013 20:46:48 -0300, >> Fabio Estevam <[email protected]> a écrit : >> >>> On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 4:58 PM, Otavio Salvador >>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Usually kernel would do the right thing but not in our case. Some >>> >>> >>> I don't understand. Why 'usually'? In what sense is our case different? >>> >> maybe most defconfig support only one machine when those in >> meta-fsl-arm support several machines sometimes with different LOADADDR >> requirements and thus need the precision to get a working kernel on a >> specific platform at compile time. > > > I'm OK to accept the meta-fsl-arm workaround for this LOADADDR error. At > least until we figure out a better way to properly fix that. > > Otavio, what do you think about adding KERNEL_EXTRA_ARGS += > "LOADADDR=${UBOOT_ENTRYPOINT}" in mxc-base.inc and mxs-base.inc instead?
This is even worse IMO as we'd be changing something without being clear we're doing. This would just make it harder to understand IMO. -- Otavio Salvador O.S. Systems E-mail: [email protected] http://www.ossystems.com.br Mobile: +55 53 9981-7854 http://projetos.ossystems.com.br _______________________________________________ meta-freescale mailing list [email protected] https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/meta-freescale
