Hi Simon,
On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 6:48 AM, Simon Glass sjg@chromium.org wrote:
Hi Tom,
On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 5:03 PM, Tom Rini trini@ti.com wrote:
On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 12:14:00AM +0100, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
Dear Tom Rini,
In message 20121219225945.GF14589@bill-the-cat you wrote:
...
With this change, applied to u-boot/master.
Argh.... :-(
Can we please undo this somehow? This does not fit at all conceptually. U-Boot is supposed to use the good ols UNIX philosophy of being terse by default, and special casing one specific storage device makes no sense at all to me.
We need to fix some of the underlying problems so that we're consistent here. Sometimes we have output (network #), sometimes we don't. Sometimes we have a speed (network, filesystem load), sometimes we don't. I'd be quite happy to have a uniform output and a uniform ON/OFF switch.
I'm happy to do something like this. Obviously we want a config, but do we also want an env variable to control it? Could be useful.
And at the risk of killing it with feature creep, perhaps we could have two levels of verbosity: progress (which repeatedly updates on the same line) and notice (which does not). That might take care of Jagannadha's use case also.
Any plan to add config for verbose messages on cmd_sf.c? seems like you plan for something, because I have some couple of patches which has verbose messages for sf read/erase/write commands. http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.boot-loaders.u-boot/149753
Thanks, Jagan.
Regards, Simon
-- Tom
U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot