On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 1:09 AM, Michal Simek monstr@monstr.eu wrote:
Dear Wolfgang,
Dear Michal Simek,
In message 49913792.9060008@monstr.eu you wrote:
COBJS-$(CONFIG_DRIVER_3C589) += 3c589.o +COBJS-$(CONFIG_PPC4xx_EMAC) += 4xx_enet.o COBJS-$(CONFIG_DRIVER_AX88180) += ax88180.o
What makes you think that CONFIG_PPC4xx_EMAC has a good place between CONFIG_DRIVER_3C589 and CONFIG_DRIVER_AX88180?
From my point of view make me more sense to rename 4xx_enec.c file to
correspond
with driver name. I mean if the config is CONFIG_PPC4xx_EMAC the
filename should
be ppc4xx_emac.c or in second case CONFIG_4XX_ENET for current
4xx_enet.c file.
From these two choices I like the first one.
Well, that's IMO for the PPC4xx custodian to decide.
Stefan, what do you think?
I would like to describe what happen. I sent to mailing list two
patches. One
with Makefile sort and second with LL_TEMAC. First patch just sort some
labels
in drivers/net/Makefile. Wolfgang sent that he don't like it and he
reject this
patch. I haven't wanted to sort any Makefile labels I just wanted to add LL_TEMAC driver. Makefile sort was not my point.
I'm aware of this. But this is how contributing to U-Boot works : you just want to add a tiny piece of code here, and you will find yourself involved in some bigger cleanup all over the place. That's what happens to me all day, and to many others, so please help to carry that burdon. Thanks.
Yes I know that's why I sent sort Makefile patch in that pack.
Regards, Michal
Best regards,
Wolfgang Denk
-- Michal Simek, Ing. (M.Eng) w: www.monstr.eu p: +42-0-721842854
OK, I'll send a clean up patch later today or tonight.
regards, Ben