On Wed, 2009-12-02 at 17:13 -0800, David Brownell wrote: > On Wednesday 02 December 2009, Zach Welch wrote: > > Add '-c noinit' at the end to suppress the second 'init', if the first > > one succeeds okay. > > I'd rather just preserve the original semantics, where "init" just > ensures that things were initialized after it runs ... instead of > reporting an error when, for some reason, they're already set up.
Well, I think we agreed that we want to eliminate 'mode' altogether. > We generally need to avoid creating backwards-incompatibilities > like that semantic change. At the moment, the general rule is > that the new way will work for about a year before the old way > stops. That's enough time to give a reasonable chance to update > all the various scripts, and enables coexistence during switches. I think you are using "exceptional" semantics, but it was my intention to preserve compatibility. For "normal" use cases, I think it continues to function as before. But that's no excuse, just rationalization. ;) For now, we could make the init's mode=COMMAND_ANY. That should be a temporary fix that solves your regression, though the other 'init' commands may need similar treatment. As far as backwards-compatibility, I have started thinking about cutting 1.0 for the sake of dropping it. If we _care_ about backwards compatibility, then we are already treating the code like the 1.0 branch and the 0.x name is misleading and detrimental to our image. If so, then cut 0.4.0 as 1.0, and let's drop the charade that developers have freedom to change stuff. That's what 0.x means to me. --Z _______________________________________________ Openocd-development mailing list [email protected] https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/openocd-development
