[U-Boot-Users] Proposed change; What do you think?
wd at denx.de
Mon Aug 23 19:10:10 CEST 2004
In message <1093270471.29614.7.camel at blarg.somerset.sps.mot.com> you wrote:
> Oh, I'm happy to keep it in a consistent state. That's not the
> question I was trying to get answered. I'm seeking acceptance of
> the condition that I can not test all the affected boards even
> though the patch would necessarily touch many boards. Compile, sure.
> Test, no way.
Submit a patch and hope that the board maintainers will test it. If
they don't test and/or don't find any problems, there will be no
complaints, and the patch will get added one day to the CVS tree.
> > Don't put to many different things into a single patch. This last
> > part has a chance of being rejected (depending on what you're going
> > to do; I'm not sure I understand your intentions).
> I never said it would all be one patch.
Thanks. Maybe I misunderstood.
> Furthermore, I was merely suggesting I'd be willing to work on
> the suggestion that Dan Malek had proposed. ACtually, just one
> aspect of it, specifically WRT the ethernet MAC address fields.
I think you misunderstood this. We already have different bd_info's
for different processors, i. e. it looks different on a 8xx than it
does on a 4xx. But within one class of processors iit should be
fixed. Should ;-)
> As I have it in my tree now, it has been left conditional, just
> the names of the #ifdef conditional has changed.
Software Engineering: Embedded and Realtime Systems, Embedded Linux
Phone: (+49)-8142-4596-87 Fax: (+49)-8142-4596-88 Email: wd at denx.de
"In matrimony, to hesitate is sometimes to be saved." - Butler
More information about the U-Boot