Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2014 21:17:45 -0700 From: Tim Kientzle <tim@kientzle.com> To: Mark R V Murray <mark@grondar.org> Cc: freebsd-arm <freebsd-arm@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Building an ARM/RPI-B release (hacked) on CURRENT/AMD64. Message-ID: <44685985-BD5A-4D5F-B6DB-99A7252F8C8C@kientzle.com> In-Reply-To: <4B9FEF94-9912-4861-9FE2-E8EC7BE3509C@grondar.org> References: <9FDD6F0E-B2A9-48D9-A3E4-181868995FDA@grondar.org> <EC41E53F-96EF-4652-9A02-D49448D104BE@kientzle.com> <4B9FEF94-9912-4861-9FE2-E8EC7BE3509C@grondar.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Apr 17, 2014, at 12:23 AM, Mark R V Murray <mark@grondar.org> wrote: >=20 > How much hacking does u-boot need for 1) FreeBSD and 2) RPI? 1) standard patches to enable API and ELF support for ubldr. Crochet = has in-tree patches for several different target boards; look for the = part that=92s the same across all of them. ;-) 2) Oleksandr=92s hacked RPi version of U-Boot is on github >=20 > Should its head-of-trunk =93just work=94? They have apparently sorted = out the R8/R9 business which should make it CLANG-ready, IIUC. As noted elsewhere, clang and U-Boot need more reconciliation. Plus standard patches for FreeBSD to enable API and ELF support for = ubldr. Plus various board-specific patches: * the hard-coded U-boot start scripts vary enormously across different = boards and are almost always very Linux-specific; * some U-Boot start scripts read additional startup scripts from disk = which allows you to tweak without overriding the hard-coded portion, but = not all, and those that do don=92t always do it the same way. Tim
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?44685985-BD5A-4D5F-B6DB-99A7252F8C8C>