Hey again
I prepared an u-boot upload which ships fw_printenv and a fw_setenv
symlink in u-boot-tools and which takes over uboot-envtools (dummy
transitional package) in git at:
git://git.debian.org/collab-maint/u-boot.git
I'd prefer hearing from the maintainer, Per Andersson, to confirm it's
ok for me to proceed to an upload; it would be towards experimental for
now, but I'd move to unstable with the 2011.03 release of u-boot (or a
pre-release).
Some implementation notes:
* I opted not to install the tools/env/README as it was mostly aimed
towards people building the tools rather than using them
* I have a warning with crc32()'s signature with gcc-4.5, but not with
4.4; I'll file a bug to look into the warnings; my preference would
be to use the same prototype as zlib (as uboot-envtools does in a
Debian patch), but I'm not sure what this entails upstream; for now,
this is built against the builtin crc32 in u-boot; I've opened a bug
against the u-boot source package to remember about this
* I copied over the examples and man pages (need to submit these
upstream); perhaps the configs should be generated during the build
instead; one important issue is copyright of the examples; I found a
couple of authors via debian/changelog, but I decided that the data
was publicly available and that the config files were mechanically
derived from the factory hardware layout; concerning comments, most
had no difference with upstream's; I found the following differences:
* typos (redundand vs redundant)
* qnap_ts101.config: explains primary versus secondary environment; I
need to figure out what to do with this; I've included a stripped
down version in the mean time
* qnap_ts119-219.config: documents machine names; I decided this
information was also mechanical
* I checked the Vcs-Git packaging repo and rescued a fix from there;
there are two things I didn't pick up:
* uboot-envedit script; this does indeed make sense within u-boot,
but I don't want to track multiple upstreams; maybe this should be
sent upstream?
* debconf / automatic configuration: I'm not too happy with more
and more packages maintaining a list of board Hardware: names :-/
I have some ideas to fix this on the long term, but it will take
time; also, I'm not too hot on debconf myself: I'd rather see d-i
install the correct config, perhaps in flash-kernel or some udeb
with board-specific knowledge
* I checked the BTS and picked configs from #582832 and #582913 and
commented on #591604 which should be kept open and moved to u-boot
* I looked at debian/TODO; I am not sure I understood points 1 and 2
being made there; Section/Priority seemed correct
* I'm using a specially crafted Version: field for u-boot's
uboot-envtools as u-boot's source version was lower
Suggestions on the above are very welcome!
Thanks
--
Loïc Minier
_______________________________________________
pkg-fso-maint mailing list
pkg-fso-maint@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-fso-maint
