Hi Scott,
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 2:25 PM, Scott Wood scottwood@freescale.com wrote:
On Wed, 2 Jun 2010 11:58:39 -0400 Ben Gardiner bengardiner@nanometrics.ca wrote:
This patch adds a new 'mtdparts add' variant: add.e (with a synomym add.i).
Why multiple ways to say the same thing, in a new command with no legacy to be compatible with?
Just mimicking the add syntax.
Even on the commands where .e and .i used to do something, that's now the default, and the suffix is unnecessary. So I don't see any need to mimic the syntax.
Ok. No objection here.
What do "e" and "i" even stand for? It looks like they were "for compatibility with older units" even when first committed.
I don't really know. Should I stick with 'add.e' or would you prefer 'add.spread' 'add.skip' or something else?
Best Regards, Ben Gardiner
--- Nanometrics Inc. http://www.nanometrics.ca