Re: [yocto] [OE-core] [PATCH 1/2] barebox: add initial support

["Enrico Jörns" <ejo@pengutronix.de>]

Am Mittwoch, dem 15.02.2023 um 14:43 +0100 schrieb Alexander Kanavin:
> On Wed, 15 Feb 2023 at 12:22, Otavio Salvador
> <otavio.salvador@ossystems.com.br> wrote:
> > > Fair enough, I'm open to the idea. It would be interesting/useful to
> > > see if anyone else in the community is in favour of this or not. I'm
> > > sure you appreciate why we need to ask the question and why we can't
> > > just add everything! :)
> > > 
> > > The community usage does appear to be primarily phytec/ptx.
> > 
> > 
> > I have used barebox in some projects in the past for multiple customers. It is a solid and
> > commonly used bootloader. I consider U-Boot the industry standard, but Barebox is also widely
> > used, and it makes sense to be part of OE-Core.
> 
> I do not quite understand why barebox needs to be specifically in
> oe-core. There's a well maintained layer for it:
> https://github.com/menschel-d/meta-barebox
> so once all those meta-phytec recipes are phased out in favour of
> using that layer, there's no fragmentation.
> 

You forgot to mention https://github.com/pengutronix/meta-ptx/tree/master/recipes-bsp/barebox

I did never say that fragmentation is my only motivation.

Regards, Enrico

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           | Enrico Jörns                |
Embedded Linux Consulting & Support        | https://www.pengutronix.de/ |
Steuerwalder Str. 21                       | Phone: +49-5121-206917-180  |
31137 Hildesheim, Germany                  | Fax:   +49-5121-206917-9    |