Jerry Van Baren wrote: > Marian Balakowicz wrote: >> From: Bartlomiej Sieka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> >> Signed-off-by: Bartlomiej Sieka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> --- >> >> Makefile | 3 +++ >> include/libfdt_env.h | 4 ++++ >> libfdt/fdt.c | 4 ++++ >> libfdt/fdt_ro.c | 4 ++++ >> libfdt/fdt_rw.c | 4 ++++ >> libfdt/fdt_strerror.c | 4 ++++ >> libfdt/fdt_wip.c | 4 ++++ >> tools/.gitignore | 7 +++++++ >> tools/Makefile | 51 >> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--- >> tools/fdt_host.h | 28 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> tools/mkimage.h | 1 + >> 11 files changed, 111 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >> create mode 100644 tools/fdt_host.h > > Arrrr, I'm not wild about this, but I cannot suggest a better way. :-( > > All these (trivial) touches to libfdt/* are annoying and could cause > patch tracking of the dtc/libfdt source to break. I guess that is the > risk we live with unless or until someone comes up with a better way. :-( > > Best regards, > gvb >
Well, the obvious approach would be to format up the patches and submit them to the [EMAIL PROTECTED] list along with an explanation as to why the libfdt changes are needed, make sure they are compatible with the kernel code as well. We'll see how badly Gibson chokes, and if the libfdt maintainer takes 'em. :-) jdl ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
