[U-Boot-Users] Proposal for patch to configure networkparameters

[Ulf Samuelsson <ulf@atmel.com>]

> In message <001901c784ba$97f07450$01c4af0a@Glamdring> you wrote:
>>
>> > while listen_to_arguments; do
>> > change patch until everybody is happy
>> > done
>>
>> In this case, my goal is to create a useable way of configuration
>> for limited parts of U-boot outside U-boot.
>
> This is reasonable.
>
>> Wolfgang just stated that he will not accept any patch making that
>> possible,.
>> The only allowed way to configure is within u-boot.
>
> This is not so different from Linux, btw. The only way to configure a
> Linux kernel is by doing this inside the Linux source tree.

No, the way buildroot works is that you decompress a linux kernel and patch 
it.
Then you can copy  $(LINUX26_KCONFIG) (defined by buildroot make 
menucconfig)
to the $(LINUX26_DIR)/.config.

$(LINUX26_KCONFIG) is of course generated by doing make xconfig inside the 
linux kernel
and then copying it to the buildroot directory.

This method meet my need to easily be able to select a working configuration 
for Linux.

I am doing the same for u-boot. A file is copied to 
include/configs/<board>.h
but there are somethings which always needs to change for a new user,
and these things need to be configured using buildroot "make menuconfig"
>
> I admit that I don't like Kconfig. But then, I'm  also  unhappy  with
> what  we have now. Ideas for a beter solution are welcome, but please
> let's discuss concepts before submitting patches.

One of my main requirements is a consistent interface and ideally
everything is using the same configuration system.
The problem with using Kconfig is that it generates a single .config file.
It would be nice if it could generate one .config per package.
buildroot, linux, u-boot, busybox.

>> We just dont think alike.
>
> This is perfectly normal. We can still try to work with each other.
>
>> Which is good and completely different to Wolfgangs approach
>> to make it as difficult as possible to maintain out of tree patches
>> in the hope that no nonGPL versions of u-boot will appear.
>
> I don't see how I could do anything against out of tree patches  even
> if I wanted, nor am I aware that I ever tried.

You don't allow u-boot to have hooks for out of tree patches.
To be successful, there needs to exists a number of place holders
where the developer have total control and simply can copy in out of tree 
stuff.
Relying on patching existing files makes upgrading your out of tree 
structure
unneccessary time consuming.

Best Regards
Ulf Samuelsson                ulf at atmel.com
Atmel Nordic AB
Mail:  Box 2033, 174 02 Sundbyberg, Sweden
Visit:  Kavalleriv?gen 24, 174 58 Sundbyberg, Sweden
Phone +46 (8) 441 54 22     Fax +46 (8) 441 54 29
GSM    +46 (706) 22 44 57

Technical support when I am not available:
AT89 C51 Applications Group: mailto:micro.hotline at nto.atmel.com
AT90 AVR Applications Group: mailto:avr at atmel.com
AT91 ARM Applications Group: mailto:at91support at atmel.com
FPSLIC Application Group: mailto:fpslic at atmel.com Best AVR