[meta-ti] using yocto and meta-ti to build for beaglebone black?

[Denys Dmytriyenko]

On Sat, Oct 19, 2013 at 07:22:31AM -0400, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> On Sat, 19 Oct 2013, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> 
> >
> >   a couple quick questions. first, as an example for a tutorial, i
> > want to show using yocto and meta-ti to build a simple
> > (core-image-minimal?) for a BBB. it seems simple enough -- i just
> > configured a new build directory, added the meta-ti layer, set MACHINE
> > to "beaglebone" and it's cranking away on all 8 cores as we speak.
> >
> >   i'm well aware of the recent u-boot uImage->zImage switch, which
> > makes me happy. :-) so as long as i get valid artifacts dumped into
> > the images/ directory when this is over, i figure i can take it from
> > there. as i'm using the master branch for everything (oe-core,
> > meta-ti), should this just work?
> >
> >   also, i just noticed the meta-ti recipe for "x-load". isn't this
> > just for generating the "MLO" file required by a number of TI boards
> > that u-boot takes care of these days? what's the relationship between
> > those two? is x-load just for TI machines for which u-boot doesn't
> > generate an appropriate MLO file?

x-load is deprecated. It's kept for old platforms only.


>   at risk of adding another question to this earlier post, my build of
> a core-image-minimal worked, and among other generated artifacts in
> images/beaglebone/, i have the files:
> 
>  * MLO -> MLO-beaglebone-2013.10-r0+gitrAUTOINC+183acb7003
>  * u-boot-spl.bin-beaglebone-2013.10-r0+gitrAUTOINC+183acb7003
> 
> which are very close in size. i'm used to just installing the MLO
> file, so what's the difference here? what am i supposed to do with the
> "spl" file?

The second one is SPL/UART:

http://processors.wiki.ti.com/index.php/AM335x_U-Boot_User's_Guide#Boot_Over_UART

-- 
Denys