[U-Boot] [PATCH] include: define bool type in a more portable way

[Graeme Russ]

Hi Masahiro Yamada,

Why would hacking /include/linux/stddef.h and /include/linux/types.h be
preferable?

Regards,

Graeme


On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 3:37 PM, Masahiro Yamada
<yamada.m at jp.panasonic.com>wrote:

> Hi.
>
> I posted v2 of this patch
> http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/292258/
>
>
> I think both of two solutions work.
>
>  (1) include <stdbool.h> in common/cmd_test.c
>       but undef true and false.
>      http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/292247/
>
>  (2) Do not include <stdbool.h> and
>        define true and false with enum.
>      http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/292258/
>
>
> Personally, I prefer (2) to (1) because
>  -  we don't need to tweak common/cmd_test.c any more
>  -  we can reduce the conflict if we have a plan to update
>       Linux-originated header files.
>
>
> Best Regards
> Masahiro Yamada
>
> _______________________________________________
> U-Boot mailing list
> U-Boot at lists.denx.de
> http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
>