On Wed, Feb 10, 2021 at 01:53:55PM +0200, Ilias Apalodimas wrote: > Hi Wolfgang, > > Thanks for having a look, > > On Wed, Feb 10, 2021 at 12:23:47PM +0100, Wolfgang Denk wrote: > > Dear Ilias, > > > > In message <[email protected]> you wrote: > > > Up to now we've been adding all the efi related configuration to > > > 'efidebug' command. The command name feels a bit weird to configure boot > > > manager related commands. Since the bootmanager is growing and we intend
I developed the command as a poorman's "efishell" as, at that time, EDK2's shell didn't work well on U-Boot UEFI subsystem. As far as I remember, Alex (ex-maintainer) didn't like to take this command, including "efidebug boot" subcommand, as a standard U-Boot command. > > > to extend it with features like defining the initrd we want to expose to > > > the kernel, it would make sense to split it on a command of it's own. > > > > > > So let's introduce a new command called bootmgr and move all of the > > > existing Boot manager functionality there. > > > > As this is EFI specific, I would appreciate to have "efi" in the > > command name, too. > > > > Maybe all EFi related commands should be collected as "efi <subcommand>" > > like we did it with the "env" commands long ago. > > We could, I'll discuss this with Heinrich and see what he thinks. > > > > > For backward compatibility e. g. 'efidebug' could be kept, but the > > new name would be 'efi debug'; likewise, your new command would be > > 'efi bootmgr' [or just 'efi boot' ?] As a matter of fact, "efi" is even now recognized as "efidebug" thanks to command name completion as there is no other "efi*" command. Then, efidebug boot ..., and [efi]bootmgr boot ... can be invoked literally as efi boot ... So I don't see much advantage to Ilias' proposal. My suggestions are: * alias "efi" to "efidebug" (if preferred), * add new configuration options for efidebug's subcommands, * only enable "boot"-related options by default (if needed) Personally, I don't like to move the portion of code from one file to another since it will break git history. In addition, I have proposed to make "bootefi bootmgr" a standalone command/application, but Heinrich rejected it. Given Ilias' concern(?), I still believe that the change is logical and makes more sense. -Takahiro Akashi > > The efidebug for boot options wasn't introduced that long ago and I don't > think anyone uses it in production. If someone would want to have it > backwards > compatible, please shout and we'll see what we can do, but I'd strongly > prefer > replacing it overall. If we truly want backwards compatibility though we must > keep > efidebug, changing the name to something like 'efi debug' just for the name > similarity wouldn't help much as it would break things regardless. > > Heinrich feel free to ignore the followup patch fixing the documentation of > efidebug. I'll change the name to something we all agree and fold in the doc > changes in v2. > > Thanks > /Ilias > > > > Thanks! > > > > Wolfgang Denk > > > > -- > > DENX Software Engineering GmbH, Managing Director: Wolfgang Denk > > HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany > > Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: [email protected] > > In my experience the best way to get something done is to give it to > > someone who is busy. - Terry Pratchett, _Going_Postal_
