Date: Sat, 6 Apr 2013 15:18:48 -0600 From: Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> To: Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org> Cc: "freebsd-arm@freebsd.org" <freebsd-arm@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: "Beyond Buildworld" (was Re: RFC: "Crochet" build tool) Message-ID: <C8AAB778-B3B5-4652-B5CD-F545BE7B740E@bsdimp.com> In-Reply-To: <CAJ-Vmo=fORbFCWeFLpXcSBMcnNc4QWgMjrp1m8n7Lei4c8=jUQ@mail.gmail.com> References: <CFBA557F-3DB9-40BA-B222-8E8C67707C9B@freebsd.org> <5DFA61DB-70E4-4C3D-ACA0-995A175706C8@neville-neil.com> <5151B454.9090402@ceetonetechnology.com> <1CBF1416-3237-4DCE-8D61-7E998265C887@neville-neil.com> <1364311809.36972.27.camel@revolution.hippie.lan> <CAJ-Vmomcaoe4cBFtFbXHSe2ygWA9JZnMkE_zoy80unuT-L1Axg@mail.gmail.com> <5151D045.80305@thieprojects.ch> <CAJ-Vmomk0aGykV2Zv_9nW9Lg9THHspkfjHhiu7dEz1k1nPAibw@mail.gmail.com> <5151D9DB.7050001@thieprojects.ch> <167CF57D-01E3-4857-BF0E-C40B00FED226@netgate.com> <CAJ-VmokxSYqy4Zr1wtN=Ln4-2wJybqGeh_LSAC1tNM44DjTF1w@mail.gmail.com> <515ADB81.7090908@freebsd.org> <C271E400-CAE1-4118-ADF8-A8CA72B25972@kientzle.com> <515DF177.9060907@freebsd.org> <4DC4C47C-D503-4155-8FAF-6D5C88D8F67C@freebsd.org> <CAJ-Vmon7dB3h3pX3x4GS0rJB1zeszQubo7L4ahPAqCkFRpe2Aw@mail.gmail.com> <8FCD7391-B9E3-478A-86E8-4414F750804D@freebsd.org> <50CC112D-2B90-4E66-9D5F-829274D041D7@bsdimp.com> <CAJ-Vmo=fORbFCWeFLpXcSBMcnNc4QWgMjrp1m8n7Lei4c8=jUQ@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Apr 6, 2013, at 3:09 PM, Adrian Chadd wrote: > FreeBSD doesn't necessarily need to support all of that, at least just = yet. I tend to agree, but only to a point. We should have a long-range plan = in mind, as well as a long term destination. We need not hit that with = the first iteration, but each iteration should get us closer. > I think we'd be in a good position if we had build scripts and base > support to build a variety of target system filesystem configurations > and images; then leave it up to an external project (which may or may > not _be_ at freebsd.org, but it doesn't have to be in /usr/src) that > builds the platform specific stuff. That way we don't get bogged down > with bootloaders and such at this stage. Yes. We don't want to be in the boot loader business. The board should = provide. Unfortunately, most board providers don't yet support the = callback API that we need to support the ubldr. We should accept that = there will be a wide range of versions and possibly even different = loaders like barebox. Linux is able to cope by having a very = standardized interface. We don't have that now, and we should adopt one. = We're currently not likely large enough to do anything other than the = Linux interface. > Ideally i'd like to see all of those bootloaders and tools in > /usr/src, just like we do for booting i386/amd64/etc systems. That way > we _do_ have a nice, tightly integrated system. But I think that's a > stretch goal. I'd opt for a ports solution to the bare-metal loader. The experience = that we had with AT91 suggests supporting a wide range of boards with = the bare-metal loaders is very hard, and we don't have the bandwidth to = do this. Warner
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?C8AAB778-B3B5-4652-B5CD-F545BE7B740E>