On Feb 22, 2008, at 8:36 AM, Bartlomiej Sieka wrote: > Wolfgang Denk wrote: >> Dear Kumar, >> in message <Pine.LNX. >> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote: >>> Changed image_get_ramdisk() to just return NULL on error and have >>> get_ramdisk() propogate that error to the caller. It's left to the >>> caller to call do_reset() if it wants to. >>> >>> Also moved calling do_reset() in get_fdt() on ppc to a common >>> location. >>> In the future we will change get_fdt() to return success/failure and >>> not call do_reset() at all. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Kumar Gala <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Just to make my position clear: I expect that you negotiate new-image >> related patches more or less directly with Bartek, who I consider as >> kind of "new-image" custodian. >> That means that I will not track the state of these patches - if you >> want me to apply something directly, please ring a bell. >> Bartek: I would also appreciate if you could merge Kumar's patches in >> a local repo and then send me just a pull request when something is >> ready to go into u-boot-testing (or even into mainline). > > OK, will coordinate new uImage stuff that gets posted to the list, > and request pulling as needed.
Works for me. I'll look at updating my patches based on the new code in the branch. - k ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ U-Boot-Users mailing list U-Boot-Users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/u-boot-users
