Wolfgang Denk wrote at Thursday, October 06, 2011 1:20 PM: > In message <74cdbe0f657a3d45afbb94109fb122ff173a2c7...@hqmail01.nvidia.com> > you wrote: > > > > Wolfgang, does this change look like a reasonable approach? > > Yes, looks good to me - with the nitpick of a bit more explicit > comment. See previous message. > > > What are your thoughts on the legacy format; should we ignore it? We > > could probably steal some bit in one of the fields for this flag, although > > technically that would be a change to the format, with potential > > compatibility issues. > > I would really like to see this supported as well - so far only a > minority of users use FIT images. > > I suggest we define a new image type (say, IH_TYPE_KERNEL_REL) for > this purpose. This would probably cause the least conflicts.
OK. Wouldn't we also need e.g. IH_TYPE_STANDALONE_REL, IH_TYPE_RAMDISK_REL and perhaps other too? -- nvpublic _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot