Wolfgang Denk wrote: > In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote: [snip]
>> Aside: verify should be an image verify command, not a env variable flag >> (see below). This is probably true of most of the current env > > We alreay have a verify command. It's called "imls". <ack> >> variables: the reason we need them is because we kept throwing stuff >> into "bootm" and then controlling it with env variables rather than >> having a sequence and controlling it with what commands are in the >> sequence. (Part of my simplification argument...) > > Hint: keep it backwards compatible, please. Yes, and then deprecate it. ;-) >> I also was thinking we should invent a new major/minor command as you >> outlined, but it didn't occur to me that "bootm" would be a good major >> command. This is a good idea: a bare "bootm <addr> (<addr>|-) <addr>" >> could be used for backward compatibility and "bootm <subcmd>" for New >> Improved[tm] functionality. > > How do your differentiate beween <addr> and <subcmd> then? Don't use deadbeef as a command? ;-) With judicious choices for subcmd names, we can first check for subcmd and fall through to the backward compatibility. [snip] Best regards, gvb ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/ _______________________________________________ U-Boot-Users mailing list U-Boot-Users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/u-boot-users
