Dear Scott Wood, > On 01/04/2013 09:58:28 AM, Marek Vasut wrote: > > Dear Scott Wood, > > > > > On 01/03/2013 11:19:35 PM, Marek Vasut wrote: > > > > Dear Scott Wood, > > > > > > > > > On 12/26/2012 12:26:13 PM, Otavio Salvador wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 1:13 AM, Marek Vasut <ma...@denx.de> > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Dear Otavio Salvador, > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> On Tue, Dec 25, 2012 at 11:08 PM, Marek Vasut > > > > <ma...@denx.de> > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > >> > Adjust the NAND partitioning layout so that there is a > > > > > > > > separate > > > > > > > > > > partition > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > for the ramdisk and fdt blob on the NAND. > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut <ma...@denx.de> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> A partition for a ramdisk? maybe initramfs or initrd might > > > > be > > > > > > > > better? > > > > > > > > > > > > > Separate ramdisk (initrd). > > > > > > > > > > > > So maybe name it 'initrd' in the partition table? > > > > > > > > > > Why bias users against using initramfs instead? > > > > > > > > I'm not biasing users against initramfs, but some users simply > > > > want > > > > > > separate > > > > ramdisk outside of the kernel. > > > > > > initramfs and initrd are different ways of formatting a ramdisk. > > > > It's > > > > > orthogonal to whether it's separate from the kernel image. > > > > True, so what is the discussion here about anyway? I fail to see the > > point -- is > > there a problem with the patch or not? If not, please apply for .01 > > release. > > I have no problem with it. My point was that "ramdisk" is a better > name than "initrd".
The patch contains "ramdisk" ... go look at the patch please. Best regards, Marek Vasut _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot