RSS Bot Posted Friday at 04:00 PM Share Posted Friday at 04:00 PM Description As mentioned here: https://github.com/armbian/build/pull/6810#issuecomment-2194178735 Out of date blobs can be an issue if the vendor ships boards with new blobs, as recently seen for FriendlyElec with the NanoPC T6 for example. The release docs do not mention any incompatibilities between versions for rk3528 and rk3568: https://github.com/armbian/rkbin/blob/master/patch-notes/RK3528_EN.md https://github.com/armbian/rkbin/blob/master/patch-notes/RK3568_EN.md For rk3566, only one warning is listed for rk3566_ddr_1056MHz_ultra_v1.19.bin but we're not using the ultra blob (what's the difference?): https://github.com/armbian/rkbin/blob/master/patch-notes/RK3566_EN.md#rk3566_ddr_1056mhz_ultra_v119bin ROCK_USB_BLOB bump depends on https://github.com/armbian/rkbin/pull/29 being merged. Other blobs have already been merged to armbian/rkbin in the past. How Has This Been Tested? [x] RK3568: ./compile.sh uboot ARTIFACT_IGNORE_CACHE=yes BOARD=nanopi-r5c BRANCH=edge BUILD_DESKTOP=no BUILD_MINIMAL=no EXPERT=yes KERNEL_CONFIGURE=no RELEASE=trixie [ ] RK3566: Not tested - @RadxaNaoki would be great if you could test on Raxda Zero 3 or similar board ๐ [ ] RK3528: Not tested - @amazingfate @sputnik2019 would be great if you could test on a RK3528 board ๐ (although the doc does not list any incompatibilities) Checklist: [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code [ ] My changes generate no new warnings [ ] Any dependent changes have been merged and published in downstream modules View the full article Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts