how easy to add extra config for NAND-less beagle?

Robert P. J. Day rpjday at
Fri Nov 16 06:16:03 EST 2012

On Thu, 15 Nov 2012, Sascha Hauer wrote:

> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 11:39:58AM -0500, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> >
> >   yup, i'm testing that shortly, but my question was more along the
> > lines of, rather than having to disable all NAND-related
> > functionality *manually*, how easy/worthwhile would it be to create an
> > additional make target that reflects a beagle *without* NAND flash?
> >
> >   one significant difference between a classic beagle and a current xM
> > is the total lack of NAND flash, and that's not a minor difference.
> > it means you can remove all barebox functionality related to that --
> > NAND routines and support, MTD stuff, JFFS2(?) support, and so on.
> > this could be automated by creating a couple new configs, say:
> >
> >   make dm3730_beaglexm_xload_defconfig
> >   make dm3730_beaglexm_defconfig
> >
> > so that the result really matches the underlying board.
> >
> >   is this worth doing?  it would seem to be fairly easy, i can whip
> > something up and test it.
> I don't think this is worth it. We should rather keep the number of
> defconfigs low. Splitting them means we have to maintain them and
> keep them in sync. Also it means to increase the time needed to
> compile all defconfigs (which I do routinely, currently on every
> commit).

  ok, that makes sense.  i'll still have a couple questions later on
the proper configuration of barebox for flash-less systems like the
xM.  thanks.



Robert P. J. Day                                 Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA


More information about the barebox mailing list