[U-Boot-Users] CLI over Ethernet

[Srivatsan]

Hi all.

    May be I have been got wrong. Please excuse me for that. I have been
a member for this group for about a month and I have also seen the mail
transactions. I must say I know for sure that It's not for requirements
alone that this group is being used and also no one is subordinate to
anyone in any open source(leave alone uboot) mailing list. 

   Also I haven't asked for particular CLI (requirement with LLC) to be
developed and given to me. What I have asked is the advantage of having
CLI over Ethernet using LLC? 

Had I mentioned requirement for the group or the code has to rewritten
by uboot group which I know is ethically wrong then I would have made a
mistake. But I just required all your help to give me a head start with
the available resources for my problem.

This group is not for showing emotions.


With Best Regards,
C.R.Srivatsan




----Original Message-----
From: wd at denx.de [mailto:wd at denx.de] 
Sent: Monday, November 29, 2004 1:57 PM
To: Srivatsan
Cc: u-boot-users at lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [U-Boot-Users] CLI over Ethernet 

Dear C.R.Srivatsan,

in message <002901c4d5d0$c1447720$4501a8c0 at bgcw301> you wrote:
> 
>     There is indeed a requirement to have CLI over Ethernet using LLC.
I

This may be a requirement for you, but please understand that it is a
non-requirement for U-Boot.

> wanted to know the best mechanism to provide CLI over Ethernet
(Whether
> it is through UDP or through LLC). If it uses UDP then uboot already
> provides me with one alternatively if it uses LLC then it has to be
> rewritten.

I'm not sure if you actually mean what you say and how you say it, or
maybe it's my limited understanding of  the  English  language  which
makes  me  feel somewhat angry: this is free software, and instead of
being thankful for finding a powerful tool for free yoiu come up with
semi-mandatory staments like "there is a requirement" or "it  has  to
be  rewritten." I would not like this tone if I was your subordinate,
which I definitely am not.

This is a free software poroject, so if you want to see  it  extended
you can either cointribute yourself by submitting patches, or you can
hire  someone  to  implement  what you want, but please do not expect
that everybody on this list starts hacking just because you feel  you
have a requirement.

>     I have one question to the uboot's design team, why was UDP chosen
> for CLI on Ethernet?     

Why not? UDP is a common standard  protocol.  You  can  use  existing
standard tools to receive and send UDP messages (see netcat). Most of
all,  this  way  the  implementation  is compatible to the netconsole
implementation used by Linux, so we have a standard console  protocol
for both U-Boot and Linux.

Best regards,

Wolfgang Denk

-- 
Software Engineering:  Embedded and Realtime Systems,  Embedded Linux
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: wd at denx.de
"A great many people think they are thinking when they are merely re-
arranging their prejudices."                          - William James




********************************DISCLAIMER**********************************

This e-mail and any attachment is for authorised use by the intended
recipient(s) only. It may contain proprietary material, confidential
information and/or be subject to legal privilege of Deccanet Designs Ltd.
If you have received this message in error, please notify the originator
immediately. If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that
you are strictly prohibited from retaining, using, copying, altering or
disclosing the contents of this message.

****************************************************************************