In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
>
> > can we at least change the name to "setexpr" or something, so as not
> > break forward compatibility with any future GNU syntax expr
> > implementation?
>
> ok. Waiting to here on wd's feeling about having this as part of the
> standard command set or not.
Well, if you ask me, I'd just call it expr.... [I have to admit that
this is for very egoistic reasons, namely being used to type "sete"
fort setenv, which then would be require me to type one more
character. And with my age you don't change such habits easily ;-) ]
Best regards,
Wolfgang Denk
--
DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Uncontrolled power will turn even saints into savages. And we can all
be counted on to live down to our lowest impulses.
-- Parmen, "Plato's Stepchildren", stardate 5784.3
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
_______________________________________________
U-Boot-Users mailing list
U-Boot-Users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/u-boot-users
