> (Dammit was later, and also there was more than one… So user-land
> flash burner it is ;) ).
'Later' by a whole 4 minutes and 20 seconds. 😄 Then two more 'Dammit' commits
landed just 25 seconds apart. The 'Dammit' camp clearly wins by majority vote.
What matters most, though, is the date.
> About versioning. I would follow the usual process and not skip a version.
>
No objection. As the old saying goes: *When in FlashRome, do as the FlashRomans
do.* - Saint ARMBrose. -
No version skipping.
> That would be great indeed.
> Do you use libflashrom in your project(s) already, or planning for future?
Not yet, but that is the plan.
Right now, every tested chip ends up in:
https://github.com/seuros/flashcat/blob/master/db/spi_nor.ron
rflasher has its own ported database:
https://github.com/ArthurHeymans/rflasher/tree/master/chips/vendors
flashprog and several other projects maintain similar information independently.
This could be another RFC in the future. I would like to see a single source of
truth for chip definitions that other projects can consume.
_______________________________________________
flashrom mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
