Re: [ECOS] redboot images difference

[Nickolay <nickolay at protei dot ru>]

Mark Salter wrote:

> On Tue, 2005-01-11 at 21:36 +0300, Nickolay wrote:
>  
>
> > Mark Salter wrote:
> >
> >    
> >
> > > On Tue, 2005-01-11 at 19:07 +0300, Nickolay wrote:
> > >
> > >      
> > >
> > > > What version is more correctly for IXDP425 board?
> > > >   
> > > >
> > > >        
> > > I suspect they are both correct. It looks like the precompiled
> > > elf was for a RAM based RedBoot and the built one is ROM (flash)
> > > based.
> > >
> > > --Mark
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >      
> > Hmm. I don't think so. See:
> >
> >    
> Ahh, right. 
>
> 2004-09-07  Mark Salter  <msalter@redhat.com>
>
> 	* include/pkgconf/mlt_arm_xscale_ixdp425_ram.mlt: Move .text to 0x80000.
>
> This is what you are seeing. The text address moved between versions.
>
> --Mark
>
>
>
>  
Hmm, with ELF version it's doesn't matter! But what with .bin version?
Because .bin is true FLT format, and addressing is related(not 
absolute), how it is working when writed on the flash that mapped on the 
0x50000000 ?
I don't understand that.




--
Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://ecos.sourceware.org/fom/ecos
and search the list archive: http://ecos.sourceware.org/ml/ecos-discuss