From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jerry Van Baren Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2008 01:12:52 -0400 Subject: [U-Boot] [WIP][PATCH 00/11] bootm refactoring In-Reply-To: References: <1218548676-25159-1-git-send-email-galak@kernel.crashing.org> <20080812201235.82C18248BF@gemini.denx.de> <20080812231516.8B8F3243AB@gemini.denx.de> Message-ID: <48A26D54.5010602@gmail.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de Kumar Gala wrote: > On Aug 12, 2008, at 6:15 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote: > >> Dear Kumar Gala, >> >> In message > A368-9ADA9590B5C3 at kernel.crashing.org> you wrote: >>> I'm adding a "boots" command that implements sub commands. Once I >> I saw it. Actually I don't like it. Why didn't you stick with the >> original plan to implement subcommands as part of bootm ? > > Can you be more precise about what you dont like. Just the new > command, how its implemented, or something else? Also, what plan did > we agree on? > > I choose a new command because of my concern about how to distinguish > the sub-command from a FIT identifier. But it looks like that might > not be an issue. Hi Kumar, The command "boots" is already taken. $ grep loads common/*.c [snip] common/cmd_load.c: "loads - load S-Record file over serial line\n", Best regards, gvb