Re: [PATCH v9 3/7] env: Allow U-Boot scripts to be placed in a .env file

[Tom Rini <trini@konsulko.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1559 bytes --]

On Sun, Oct 24, 2021 at 05:46:00PM +0200, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Tom,
> 
> In message <20211022144759.GG3577824@bill-the-cat> you wrote:
> > 
> > > Any escape character is also a legal name character.
> >
> > I am struggling to have a non-meme reaction to this.  Perhaps the best
> > step is just earlier on in the series note that variable names need to
> > fit within the broadly and commonly used set of characters and assorted
> > funny business you can do historically needs to be migrated.
> 
> Indeed I think this is the most reasonable approach.
> 
> Like you cannot write any aritrary code in plain C and have to fall
> back to assembler in a few places, this patch series should simply
> not claim to be able to support all legal environment settings.
> 
> It is a convenience tool, and it is OK if it has a few restrictions,
> like for the character set of supported variable names.
> 
> But:
> 
> 1) These restrictions must be clearly documented, both in the commit
>    message and in the related documentation/readme.
> 2) There should be another, more primitive way to generate
>    environment settings without these restrictions..

First, in that we don't have tests today for any of the "interesting"
possible variable options, I have no clue which ones even work as
intended.

Second, yes, an end result here should be that yes, the default
environment should be more easily buildable and integrated with
arbitrary tools, so if something else can parse it (libubootenv?) it can
be done.

-- 
Tom

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 659 bytes --]