[U-Boot-Users] bootm change for standalone images

[Wolfgang Denk <wd@denx.de>]

In message <1091044779.17855.13.camel@mud> you wrote:
>
> > I don't think that this is a "generic" OS.
> 
> Do you not like the name. Are you concerned with belittling RTEMS?

I don't like the term "generic OS" because  IMHO  there  is  no  such
thing.

> > Frankly, I don't like it.
> 
> Any reason why or just a gut feeling?

A bit more than this, but difficult to put in words.

What you have is clearly NOT a U-Boot standalone application - which,
by definition, will be based on services provided by U-Boot and after
succesful completion will return to U-Boot. Since you  overwrite  the
exception  vector code you cannot use U-Boot services, and you cannot
return.

So you must have something different...


> I just wanted it to be small and simple. It seems like

Yes, I understand this.

> Would you prefer something like this?
> ....
> 	case IH_TYPE_STANDALONE:
...
> 	case IH_TYPE_STANDALONE_DISABLE_IRQ:

No, of course not - see above. The environment for U-Boot  standalone
applications  is  well defined (at least in my head), and it does NOT
allow you to overwrite any of U-Boot's code, including the  exception
vectors.

To avoid duplicating code or to use misleading names I see two simple
options: (1) just use "-O RTEMS" when building your images and  gnash
your    teeth    when    you   see   "RTEMS"   printed   instead   of
"your_custom_code_without_a_proper_name", or (2)  give  your  code  a
name  which we can add as new OS type, and let's use the RTEMS booter
for your new "OS", too.

I think I'd like to see you chosing (1).

Best regards,

Wolfgang Denk

-- 
Software Engineering:  Embedded and Realtime Systems,  Embedded Linux
Phone: (+49)-8142-4596-87  Fax: (+49)-8142-4596-88  Email: wd at denx.de
Behind every great man, there is a woman -- urging him on.
	-- Harry Mudd, "I, Mudd", stardate 4513.3