Dear Otavio Salvador,

In message CAP9ODKqPY51QzdLPejC4GyO3H-S0jYwFxEipEhSebX74Jkg0aQ@mail.gmail.com you wrote:

I can work on that as far as I know what people expect to have. In meanwhile I'd prefer to have this in since it allow the default environment to just work in our BSP layer for OpenEmbedded.

There is no such thing as "the default environment".

The default environment is vendor specific at bets, and usualy board specific. As explained before, I will not accept the Freescale style on boards maintained by DENX.

Not because I consider it inherently bad, but for example because it is different from what we, our customers, our documentation and our test scripts are used to.

Best regards,

Wolfgang Denk

Dear Marek,

In message 201205292314.04143.marex@denx.de you wrote:

...

Not because I consider it inherently bad, but for example because it is different from what we, our customers, our documentation and our test scripts are used to.

Then I guess some kind of "common env" for all boards won't happen ?

I don't see a real chance. Pick any of the bigger vendors - say Freescale: do you consider it a realistic chance that all their boards (PPC, ARM, ColdFire, what else) get converted to a common environment? Do you expect that TI and Samsung and Marvell and ... agree with this approach and apply it on thier boards as ell? Or vice versa?

I think the best we can do is factor out some parts we consider well designed, and use these in the boards in our own responsibility. Then we can start pointing people at that and try to convince them to accept this for new stuff added.

But reorganizing existing environents is basicly impossible - all the bigger vendors will tell you how much effort it would take to update just all the documentation, not to mention to update all the boards and scrpts and handle the resulting board breakages / brickages.

Best regards,

Wolfgang Denk