In message 1091044779.17855.13.camel@mud you wrote:
I don't think that this is a "generic" OS.
Do you not like the name. Are you concerned with belittling RTEMS?
I don't like the term "generic OS" because IMHO there is no such thing.
Frankly, I don't like it.
Any reason why or just a gut feeling?
A bit more than this, but difficult to put in words.
What you have is clearly NOT a U-Boot standalone application - which, by definition, will be based on services provided by U-Boot and after succesful completion will return to U-Boot. Since you overwrite the exception vector code you cannot use U-Boot services, and you cannot return.
So you must have something different...
I just wanted it to be small and simple. It seems like
Yes, I understand this.
Would you prefer something like this? .... case IH_TYPE_STANDALONE:
...
case IH_TYPE_STANDALONE_DISABLE_IRQ:
No, of course not - see above. The environment for U-Boot standalone applications is well defined (at least in my head), and it does NOT allow you to overwrite any of U-Boot's code, including the exception vectors.
To avoid duplicating code or to use misleading names I see two simple options: (1) just use "-O RTEMS" when building your images and gnash your teeth when you see "RTEMS" printed instead of "your_custom_code_without_a_proper_name", or (2) give your code a name which we can add as new OS type, and let's use the RTEMS booter for your new "OS", too.
I think I'd like to see you chosing (1).
Best regards,
Wolfgang Denk