On 7/5/21 11:29 AM, Simon Glass wrote:
Hi Sean,
On Thu, 1 Jul 2021 at 00:16, Sean Anderson seanga2@gmail.com wrote:
Several functions have different names than they do in TCL. To make things easier for those familiar with TCL, rename them to their TCL equivalents. At the moment, this is only done for functions not used by LIL_FULL. Some functions need more substantive work to conform them to TCL. For example, in TCL, there is a `string` function with a subcommand of `compare`, which is the same as the top-level function `compare`. Several functions also have no TCL equivalent. Do we need these?
TODO: do this for all functions
Signed-off-by: Sean Anderson seanga2@gmail.com
common/cli_lil.c | 28 ++++++++++++++-------------- 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
Is your intent to create a fork of this in U-Boot?
Yes. I believe some of the major additions I have made (especially "[RFC PATCH 21/28] cli: lil: Add a distinct parsing step") would not be accepted by upstream.
Could we not update things upstream, at least as an option, to avoid carrying these patches?
For some of the smaller patches, that may be possible. However, I am not a fan of the major amount of ifdefs that Hush has. For something as core as a shell, I think we should be free to make changes as we see fit without worrying about how it will affect a hypothetical backport.
For this patch in particular, I believe upstream would no accept it because it would break backwards compatibility for existing LIL users. However, I view compatibility with TCL as a whole more valuble than compatibility with LIL.
--Sean