this week work on KBOOT

[Wolfgang Spraul]

Dear Xiangfu,
sounds good!
I wouldn't worry about being slow at the beginning. Openmoko is big  
and once you spend some time to understand the system, you will become  
a lot faster in the future.

Andy, are you saying we should not use Kexec/Kboot? Just a reduced u- 
boot?
Unfortunately Werner is on vacation so we have to guess what he would  
say.
Can you settle on something and give Xiangfu clear direction? Then  
hopefully once Werner is back he will agree with that...
Wolfgang

On May 31, 2008, at 10:21 PM, Andy Green wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Somebody in the thread at some point said:
> | Hi Wolfgang:
> | This week I did not spend a lot of time in KBOOT,
> | Because of personal reasons.
> |
> | At May 30, I have listened to the Richard Stallman's speech, he said
> | that "write small piece code of lager project, don't start at a  
> small
> | code".
> | I have always SMALL CODE from the start, so when I started to  
> OPENMOKO
> | time, I found that I work in LAGER CODE PROJECT is not very  
> experienced.
> | So the progress a bit slow.
> | Next week, I will continue to compile KBOOT kernel.
> |
> | A small  question:
> | If I just want to KBOOT support MTD, does The KBOOT kernel need  
> OPENMOKO
> | kernel patch?
>
> Maybe Werner will disagree, but what we actually need to push us  
> forward
> is U-Boot reduction into "tiny bootloader" and the support for the  
> less
> horrible "fixed worst-case offset partitioning" in NAND rather than  
> the
> current really horrible dynparts.
>
> Kexec / Kboot itself is less crucial because we can get most of the
> benefit from it with simply a backup kernel + rootfs.  But without a
> bootloader that is more sane than current dynparts U-Boot, we are into
> continuing misery.
>
> Probably RMS didn't bring suffering created by NAND into his tender
> consideration, but if he did, I guess he would be telling you the same
> (but with a hard disk platter on his head).
>
> - -Andy
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
>
> iEYEARECAAYFAkhBXtkACgkQOjLpvpq7dMp1awCfZgoED57tmIX/NKRn9bMkaT+y
> 5gIAoIaDQNac+PM6kRy1JRig10oVBtRZ
> =7hRh
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----