[PATCH, RFC]

[Grant Likely]

On Fri, Mar 6, 2009 at 9:22 PM, Grant Likely <grant.likely at secretlab.ca> wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 6, 2009 at 3:32 PM, Eddie Dawydiuk <eddie at embeddedarm.com> wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> Let's try this one more time. The last patch was using the clocks for a
>> custom board based on the Yosemite board and was referencing a non-existent
>> ethNadr( I forgot to pull out this code out).
>
> But the question remains: Why do you need simpleboot support for
> Yosemite when you can use a uImage or cuImage with u-boot?

On a more general note; this patch also diverges from the original
model for simple image.  The idea behind simpleimage was that it would
contain a fully formed device tree, with no fixups necessary.  I want
to think carefully before diverging from that.

Cheers,
g.

-- 
Grant Likely, B.Sc., P.Eng.
Secret Lab Technologies Ltd.