From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Timur Tabi Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2007 15:20:27 -0600 Subject: [U-Boot-Users] Changes to U-Boot Development Process In-Reply-To: <20070118211045.9C654353CCB@atlas.denx.de> References: <20070118211045.9C654353CCB@atlas.denx.de> Message-ID: <45AFE49B.8080909@freescale.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de Wolfgang Denk wrote: > Nevertheless, I see actually no reason to change the size limit. I > haven't seen any many board/ directories that exceed 40..50 kB in > size, and if you compress the patch than the size limit should not > affect you. Well, compressing makes it difficult to read inside an email. I think patches shouldn't be compressed. However, I don't know why you would say that adding a new board should be under 40KB. Adding a new board typically requires two files: a header file in include/configs/, and a .c file in board/xxx/. The .c file is actually accompanied by a config file, a Makefile, an lds file, and maybe some other .c files. The sum total of all these files is usually more than 40KB. I think what you're suggesting is that the patch be divided into two patches: one that contains the header file, and the other that contains the rest, but that doesn't make sense. All of these files belong together as a single commit, because U-Boot can't be compiled without all of them together. I think the 40KB limit should be increased to 100KB. That's enough to support all files for an entire board. -- Timur Tabi Linux Kernel Developer @ Freescale