From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Robert Schwebel Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2003 14:43:57 +0200 Subject: [U-Boot-Users] [PATCH] 1/5: cmd_boot In-Reply-To: <20030331123201.33EA4C587C@atlas.denx.de> References: <20030331114517.GW7702@pengutronix.de> <20030331123201.33EA4C587C@atlas.denx.de> Message-ID: <20030331124357.GA7702@pengutronix.de> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de On Mon, Mar 31, 2003 at 02:31:56PM +0200, Wolfgang Denk wrote: > That does not mean that it doesn't show some weird behaviour. Are you sure the weird behaviour comes from minicom? Or is it the combination of minicom and some of it's backend programs? > Ummm... if there are better. working alternatives I feel tempted to > ignore broken software. I generally have no problem with using stone aged software, but for a terminal program (which is also used by non-hackers) I prefer using something with at least a _little_ bit of usability comfort (menues and stuff). Unfortunately, there is no better thing than minicom around for Linux... > Really? I don't. And I don't recommend it. Instead, I recommend to > ignore it. I see little advanteages. Use Ckermit - it is much more > flexible, it works, and it it available for a plethora of systems, > not only Linux. People use it, so it should be supported. Other question: does my patch do any harm to your ckermit? If not, what's the problem? Robert -- Dipl.-Ing. Robert Schwebel | http://www.pengutronix.de Pengutronix - Linux Solutions for Science and Industry Braunschweiger Str. 79, 31134 Hildesheim, Germany Handelsregister: Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 Phone: +49-5121-28619-0 | Fax: +49-5121-28619-4