On 2014-08-11, Russell King - ARM Linux [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

The problem is now you've got a kernel image that won't run on both
the '9g20 and the '9g25.  The requirement is to have a kernel image
that will run on either.

It depends what you call a kernel image.

As far as I'm concerned (and as I've been concerned from day one of uboot
coming into ARM), the kernel image is the zImage, not the crap that uboot
decides to dictate that you must provide for it to use.

I've been pretty clear over the years that I utterly despise uboot's
custom format - and you're starting to find out why.  Welcome to the
inflexibility has caused. :)

Yea, I've got my own issues with U-Boot, but that's a whole 'nother
thread.  In the end, it was a lot less painful to put up with U-Boot's
issues than it was to write/port something else.

While you have a point there, that's a choice of how you do your
kernel upgrades.

If you supply a zImage, all the dtbs, a script which does the
programming of the kernel onto the target, and a copy of mkimage,
then you can do all the steps I've highlighted above on the target -
without the customer even having to know what platform they're on,
because your script can work it out.

Good point.

There's plenty of workarounds possible for the old uboot dilemma...

Definitely.  It all comes to do trying to figure out when the
work-arounds add up to more work than doing it the "right" way and
upgrading everything.

-- 
Grant Edwards               grant.b.edwards        Yow! All of life is a blur
                                  at               of Republicans and meat!
                              gmail.com