Kumar Gala wrote:
On Aug 12, 2008, at 6:15 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
Dear Kumar Gala,
In message <B10531D5-A045-4A60- A368-9ADA9590B5C3@kernel.crashing.org> you wrote:
I'm adding a "boots" command that implements sub commands. Once I
I saw it. Actually I don't like it. Why didn't you stick with the original plan to implement subcommands as part of bootm ?
Can you be more precise about what you dont like. Just the new command, how its implemented, or something else? Also, what plan did we agree on?
I choose a new command because of my concern about how to distinguish the sub-command from a FIT identifier. But it looks like that might not be an issue.
Hi Kumar,
The command "boots" is already taken. $ grep loads common/*.c [snip] common/cmd_load.c: "loads - load S-Record file over serial line\n",
Best regards, gvb