Dominic Clifton

Yeah, it looks like the calculation for display lines is not correct somewhere. @SteveCEvans are you able to position OSD elements on lines 14-16?

Basically, anything that's not unified targets re-creates the problems that unified targets was trying to solve, some of which were: * users not knowing which firmware to flash * each...

> I and other folks have found few kB that we can save (optimization or removing not performance affecting things) but it is not sustainable approach. It will not work...

Other alternatives include: * dropping unified target support and going back to non-unified. * users selecting firmware based on a limited set of features they want - opentx has had...

@MJ666 I agree there is no good or easy solution, but the current unified target system isn't sustainable as more and more features and code are added but nothing is...

Just re-stating that this PR still doesn't address any of the concerns in https://github.com/betaflight/betaflight/pull/11138#issuecomment-998257914 or the proposed solutions in https://github.com/betaflight/betaflight/pull/11138#issuecomment-998274508 for which there was at least two people that supported...

> What about blackbox? Is it disabled in memory mapped mode? It's true that you can't use it. However I have another target which has an SPI flash chip *and*...

@ledvinap I pushed a commit so that the target definiton excludes FlashFS when using Memory Mapped flash. I'd forgotten that I had done that in my other targets. Thanks for...

@haslinghuis not quite sure how anyone is going to do any testing other than me as it would require someone with a suitably wired up FC and flash chip. All...

I agree this should be resolved, I'm always loading up the wrong one. The simplest solution that addresses point 2 is to rename the non-HAL files them from `system*.c/h` to...