[U-Boot] [PATCH] ARM: lacie_kw: add support for WIRELESS_SPACE

[Albert ARIBAUD]

Hi Tom,

On Sat, 22 Sep 2012 10:38:22 -0700, Tom Rini <trini at TI.com> wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> On 09/22/12 01:51, Albert ARIBAUD wrote:
> > Hi Simon,
> > 
> > On Wed, 22 Aug 2012 17:16:21 +0200, Simon Guinot 
> > <simon.guinot at sequanux.org> wrote:
> > 
> >> On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 12:16:40AM -0700, Prafulla Wadaskar
> >> wrote:
> >>> 
> >>> 
> >>>> -----Original Message----- From: u-boot-bounces at lists.denx.de
> >>>> [mailto:u-boot- bounces at lists.denx.de] On Behalf Of Albert
> >>>> ARIBAUD Sent: 18 August 2012 02:59 To: Tom Rini Cc:
> >>>> u-boot at lists.denx.de Subject: Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] ARM:
> >>>> lacie_kw: add support for WIRELESS_SPACE
> >>>> 
> >>>> Hi Tom,
> >>>> 
> >>>> On Fri, 17 Aug 2012 10:55:38 -0700, Tom Rini <trini at ti.com>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>> 
> >>>>> On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 08:08:34PM +0200, Albert ARIBAUD
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>> 
> >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Albert ARIBAUD
> >>>>>> <albert.u.boot at aribaud.net>
> >>>>> [snip]
> >>>>>> @@ -90,8 +100,14 @@ #define CONFIG_SYS_IDE_MAXDEVICE
> >>>>>> 1 #if defined(CONFIG_NET2BIG_V2) #define
> >>>>>> CONFIG_SYS_PROMPT		"2big2> " -#else +#elif
> >>>>>> defined(CONFIG_NETSPACE_V2) #define CONFIG_SYS_PROMPT
> >>>>>> "ns2> " +#elif defined(CONFIG_INETSPACE_V2) +#define
> >>>>>> CONFIG_SYS_PROMPT		"is2> " +#elif
> >>>>>> defined(CONFIG_WIRELESS_SPACE) +#define CONFIG_SYS_PROMPT
> >>>>>> "ws> " +#else +#define CONFIG_SYS_PROMPT		"lacie-kw> "
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> Is this really a good thing?  Over here I've been trying / 
> >>>>> hoping to get everyone to just use 'U-Boot # ' as the
> >>>>> prompt as this makes automated testing easier and there's
> >>>>> other run-time ways to see what we're on.
> >>> 
> >>> I personally vote to have common boot prompt 'U-boot #'.
> >>> 
> >>>> 
> >>>> I quite like prompts that identify the board I'm on, but it's
> >>>> not a must either. Cc:ing Simon in cas his own patches re
> >>>> lacie_kw would be impacted by your suggestion.
> >>> 
> >>> Well, we can expose a command to detect/print the board info,
> >>> if needed.
> >> 
> >> The run-time command "version" already returns both the system
> >> and the machine informations. This command can be used for
> >> testing purposes. IMHO the only requirement for an U-Boot prompt
> >> is to be short enough. Everything else is a matter of taste. Mine
> >> goes for the machine name.
> >> 
> >> Regards,
> >> 
> >> Simon
> > 
> > Tom,
> > 
> > Can automated test cope with a general prompt of the form '.*#' ?
> 
> Sure, probably.  It's really just something that popped into my head
> rather than a hard requirement or anything.  It's also possible to
> just setup your testing framework to take the prompt as a variable, so
> this is just a personal preference thing.

Ok, then, prompts will stay as they are in the patch.

BTW, I took a look at prompts across the whole codebase... You get all
sorts. :)

Amicalement,
-- 
Albert.