Op 18 dec. 2011, om 21:27 heeft Bruce Ashfield het volgende geschreven:

> On Sun, Dec 18, 2011 at 3:13 PM, Koen Kooi <koen@dominion.thruhere.net> wrote:
>> 
>> Op 18 dec. 2011, om 20:47 heeft Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov het volgende geschreven:
>> 
>>> As per org.oe.dev and meta-oe's kernel.bbclass move uImage creation to
>>> separate task from do_deploy. This way the do_install task can also
>>> benefit from generated uImage.
>>> 
>>> The only major feature of oe-core's version (not to recreate uImage
>>> if it exists) is retained in this patch.
>> 
>> I still don't agree with that behaviour. The in-kernel uImage code is just like the in-kernel defconfigs: useless for people who aren't kernel developers.
> 
> In that case, shouldn't people doing u-boot development (or other
> non-kernel developers),
> be building a uImage via something that isn't in kernel.bbclass ?

I use the kernel.bbclass in meta-oe, that does what I need.