On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 12:18:38PM -0600, Jordan Crouse wrote:
On 30/04/08 11:21 -0600, Myles Watson wrote:
On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 10:18 AM, Jordan Crouse jordan.crouse@amd.com wrote:
On 30/04/08 10:16 -0600, Myles Watson wrote:
-----Original Message----- From: Jordan Crouse [mailto:jordan.crouse@amd.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2008 10:08 AM To: Myles Watson Cc: Coreboot Subject: Re: ADLO for buildrom
I don't know what the history of the ADLO code is - any reason why we can't give it a home in payloads/ on SVN instead of living in the buildrom code?
I don't think so. The old code was in v2's tree under utils/
I didn't think it was too big of a deal, since it's only one assembly file, a make file, and two elf headers. I admit it looks like a lot with all the documentation.
I'm happy to have it live wherever's best. Who has to set that up?
Its all set up - just push - I recommend payloads/adlo.
Here are two patches. One adds a lightened ADLO to payloads/adlo. The other adds ADLO to buildrom.
The only non-specific change is an error if there is no payload selected, since it causes the build to fail.
Signed-off-by: Myles Watson mylesgw@gmail.com
Acked-by: Jordan Crouse jordan.crouse@amd.com x 2
NACK for now. Let's wait a bit with the ADLO part at least. Why are we copying stuff around partially only? We have coreboot-v2/util/ADLO already. I agree that payloads/adlo/ is the better place for it, but we should simply 'svn mv' it there.
Uwe.