On Thu 30 Jul 2009 15:55, Wolfgang Denk pondered: > Dear Robin Getz, > > In message <200907301550.40651.rg...@blackfin.uclinux.org> you wrote: > > > > I assume - no Invariant Sections, no Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover > > Texts? or did you desire something else? > > We don't have such detailed plans yet.
Depending on the exact final plans, Analog Devices would be happy to donate anything from the U-Boot documentation we have created over the past few years.... https://docs.blackfin.uclinux.org/doku.php?id=bootloaders:u-boot While the examples are Blackfin specific, most should be generic enough to ensure that the reader should understand what to do on their architecture. We see maintaining something separate a duplication of effort, and wasted resources spent on documentation creation (which is a task most developers don't like anyways)... I think Mike brought this up awhile ago - http://www.mail-archive.com/u-boot-us...@lists.sourceforge.net/msg04491.html Which gets back to the original question... On Thu, 17 Apr 2008 11:02:18 -0700 Mike Frysinger pondered: > On Thursday 17 April 2008, Detlev Zundel wrote: > > Hi Mike, > > > > > On Monday 14 April 2008, Detlev Zundel wrote: > > >> > we maintain a Blackfin-specific u-boot wiki that goes into quite a > > >> > bit of detail, some of which is duplicated with the main u-boot > > >> > wiki. how do people feel about extending the u-boot wiki to allow > > >> > for arch-specific details ? > > >> > > >> What exactly do you have in mind? I surely don't see any principal > > >> problem here. > > >> > > >> It would certainly be valuable to get all U-Boot related info > > >> collected in a central place and have pointers wherever that make > > >> sense... > > > > > > from my reading of the wiki, it's more of a technical/command reference > > > than a guide. the wiki we maintain is geared to be more of a guide. i > > > think the two can be merged, i just dont want to convert things only to > > > find out people dont want to take it that direction. > > > > Just to be clear, we are discussing the DULG wiki, right? > > is there any other worth talking about :) > > > I agree that in the current state the documentation is more a reference > > but IIRC that wasn't really a conscious design decision. It simply > > turned out this way in the end. > > > > So I do not see any general problem in adding "guide style" sections in > > there. Maybe then most of the current documentation can then be shifted > > to a "commands reference" section. > > OK > > > One problem I see though is how to correctly adapt such sections to the > > board specific nature of the DULG. Hopefully we can get away with > > mostly generic text passages and only a few ifdefs. It would be very > > helpful to know more concrete plans (outline!) to think further about > > these implications. Are there any thoughts about this? _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot