On 2018 Feb 10 (Sat) at 12:45:02 +0000 (+0000), Stuart Henderson wrote: :On 2018/02/10 16:30, Jonathan Gray wrote: :> On Sat, Feb 10, 2018 at 04:27:47PM +1100, Jonathan Gray wrote: :> > On Sat, Feb 10, 2018 at 06:02:16AM +0100, Peter Hessler wrote: :> > > On 2018 Feb 10 (Sat) at 14:39:06 +1100 (+1100), Jonathan Gray wrote: :> > > :On Sat, Feb 10, 2018 at 03:11:27AM +0100, Peter Hessler wrote: :> > > :> Annoyingly, the u-boot firmware necessary for the pinebook isn't :> > > :> upstreamed and can't for $reasons. :> > > :> :> > > :> So, here is a separate package so users can make progress. This is so :> > > :> it doesn't interfere with the primary u-boot package, and will be :> > > :> deleted when/if the support is upstreamed. :> > > :> :> > > :> I can boot multi-user, and run X with this on the pinebook. :> > > :> :> > > :> OK? :> > > : :> > > :From what I understand this includes the patches from :> > > :https://github.com/anarsoul/u-boot-pine64/tree/pinebook-wip-20180206 :> > > : :> > > :> > > Yes, correct. :> > > :> > > :Would it be easier to have the port point to github for updating :> > > :to different commits? (Though that particular branch will also need :> > > :https://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2018-February/320043.html ) :> > > : :> > > :> > > Sure, and I pulled in that patch to files/ (it's not a local change, and :> > > this makes chasing updates easier). :> > > :> > > :> > > :If not then a note referring to the github repository/branch/commit :> > > :etc somewhere would be helpful. :> > > : :> > > :COMMENT should be adjusted for pinebook as well. :> > > : :> > > :> > > Updated, OK? :> > :> > That particular combination of U-Boot has version 2018.03-rc1 at the :> > moment. VERSION in the Makefile is 2018.01 but you could just :> > drop VERSION/PKGNAME and just set :> > :> > DISTNAME=u-boot-pinebook-${V} :> > :> > You've got CVS directories in the tarball from the u-boot port which :> > will upset cvs on import. The already expanded $OpenBSD$ should be fine. :> :> And maybe move the patch from files to patches? Not sure how the split :> is decided there. I was surprised the patch in files applied. :> : :It's done by hand in the ports Makefile in do-build. I'd drop that in :favour of fetching from an upstream source like : :PATCHFILES= u-boot-pinebook-efi_status_t.patch:1 :MASTER_SITES1= https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/871561/mbox/?/ :PATCH_DIST_STRIP= -p1 :
Oh, yes, that is much nicer.
:MODPY_ADJ_FILES handling is odd. One of the files doesn't exist. Also
:you just set the variable, you don't need to run MODPY_BIN_ADJ yourself.
:But lastly the python port now includes a /usr/local/bin/python2 symlink
:which will work for these files without subst'ing them; MODPY_ADJ_FILES
:can just be zapped.
:
This is directly copied from the main u-boot Makefile, and I want to
keep them in sync. Yes, it is a bit silly, but I strongly don't want to
screw myself over when it comes time to merge them in.
Updated tarball is attached.
--
Trying to define yourself is like trying to bite your own teeth.
-- Alan Watts
u-boot-pinebook.tgz
Description: application/tar-gz
