On Tue, Oct 05, 2021 at 09:33:18AM -0600, Simon Glass wrote:
Hi Wolfgang,
On Tue, 5 Oct 2021 at 08:56, Wolfgang Denk wd@denx.de wrote:
Dear Simon,
In message CAPnjgZ1tRi5SsqU0K8HXgj-4xCs7i9TLX4Mj0_D=Cpj8BAn32w@mail.gmail.com you wrote:
Add a feature that brings in a .env file associated with the board config, if present. To use it, create a file in a board/<vendor>/env directory called <board>.env (or common.env if you want the same environment for all boards).
This should be no exclusive "or" here. If a common.env exists, it should be used for all boards, and if additionally one ore more <board>.env files exist, these should ALSO be applied to the respective boards.
Is it not enough to use #include in the main file? We have a similar feature with the u-boot.dtsi files and in that case we only choose the most specific.
- This requires that the .env files are run through CPP, which is only added in a later patch.
OK perhaps I should just merge the patches. It is a bit artificial having two and it seems that people agree we need the += syntax.
It's important to maintain bisectability, yes. But functionality should be evaluated at the end of the series, not intermediate steps. I don't have a strong opinion either way on if these two patches are merged, or not. So on a similar note, all of the feedback about the current env documentation is good and helpful, but I think a txt -> rST then enhance the rST makes the most sense so that we don't "hide" improvements within the migration.