Hi Simon,
On Wed, 22 Aug 2012 17:16:21 +0200, Simon Guinot simon.guinot@sequanux.org wrote:
On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 12:16:40AM -0700, Prafulla Wadaskar wrote:
-----Original Message----- From: u-boot-bounces@lists.denx.de [mailto:u-boot- bounces@lists.denx.de] On Behalf Of Albert ARIBAUD Sent: 18 August 2012 02:59 To: Tom Rini Cc: u-boot@lists.denx.de Subject: Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] ARM: lacie_kw: add support for WIRELESS_SPACE
Hi Tom,
On Fri, 17 Aug 2012 10:55:38 -0700, Tom Rini trini@ti.com wrote:
On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 08:08:34PM +0200, Albert ARIBAUD wrote:
Signed-off-by: Albert ARIBAUD albert.u.boot@aribaud.net
[snip]
@@ -90,8 +100,14 @@ #define CONFIG_SYS_IDE_MAXDEVICE 1 #if defined(CONFIG_NET2BIG_V2) #define CONFIG_SYS_PROMPT "2big2> " -#else +#elif defined(CONFIG_NETSPACE_V2) #define CONFIG_SYS_PROMPT "ns2> " +#elif defined(CONFIG_INETSPACE_V2) +#define CONFIG_SYS_PROMPT "is2> " +#elif defined(CONFIG_WIRELESS_SPACE) +#define CONFIG_SYS_PROMPT "ws> " +#else +#define CONFIG_SYS_PROMPT "lacie-kw> "
Is this really a good thing? Over here I've been trying / hoping to get everyone to just use 'U-Boot # ' as the prompt as this makes automated testing easier and there's other run-time ways to see what we're on.
I personally vote to have common boot prompt 'U-boot #'.
I quite like prompts that identify the board I'm on, but it's not a must either. Cc:ing Simon in cas his own patches re lacie_kw would be impacted by your suggestion.
Well, we can expose a command to detect/print the board info, if needed.
The run-time command "version" already returns both the system and the machine informations. This command can be used for testing purposes. IMHO the only requirement for an U-Boot prompt is to be short enough. Everything else is a matter of taste. Mine goes for the machine name.
Regards,
Simon
Tom,
Can automated test cope with a general prompt of the form '.*#' ?
Amicalement,