On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 11:31:50PM +0100, Martin Michlmayr wrote: > * Robert Nelson <robertcnelson@gmail.com> [2008-11-12 10:46]: > > Which reminds me, it's too late for lenny, but what's the best way to > > get this board's kernel added to lenny+1? The best way is to get omap3 support rolled into mainline (Linus's) kernel. The Debian kernel is based Linus's kernel, and the kernel maintainers are understandably reluctant to add external patches on top of that. I believe Current status is that basic OMAP3 and some OMAP2 support is in mainline kernel now. The biggest bit missing ATM is the TWL4030 driver. And then the big stream of power managment stuff that is still WiP... > The fundamental problem we have on arm is that we have to restrict the > number of kernels we build because otherwise the kernel package takes > too long to build. So you'd have to come up with a good argument as > to why we should add an OMAP kernel (e.g. how many users are there > going to be; which devices use such a CPU, etc). > However, we'd like to replace the versatile kernel (used for QEMU) > with a kernel that runs on common hardware as well as QEMU, and OMAP > is one possible candiate. See > http://lists.debian.org/debian-arm/2008/06/msg00075.html > Looking at this message, my questions would be: are multi-omap kernels > (omap2+omap3) possible now? Tony can probably answer, but the answer is probably "not quite there yet" > How good is OMAP2 and OMAP3 support in > QEMU these days? OMAP2 is relatively good, yet you'll probably want svn version of qemu. setting up networking and mass storage for the N800 qemu is a bit of a hassle compared to the versatile emulation. -- "rm -rf" only sounds scary if you don't have backups
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature