EV-64260-BP & GT64260 bi_recs
wd at denx.de
Wed Mar 20 11:24:27 EST 2002
In message <20020319235815.GU3762 at opus.bloom.county> you wrote:
> > The systems I see shipping in the next 6 months or so will be based
> > on 2.4 kernel; I think we should define this feature rather sooner or
> > later to try it out and get it right.
> Yes, but the place to work on things isn't 2.4, it's 2.5.
OK. Then stop all efforts on 2.4 _now_ ???
> > The command line is pretty limited in leght, and there are many more
> > "interesting" things you want to pass to proprietary drivers etc. I
> > rather had common stuff like this somewhere else...
> Yes, but the question isn't what we'd rather do, it's what we need to do
> for right now, and what we need to do for the future. This does make
> sense for the future, but not for right now.
We are changing the interface from bd_info to bi_recs.
We had the baudrate in bd_info, and nobody complained. I'm just
asking to preserve the current state with as minimal changes visible
to the user as possible.
It is _you_ who is trying to start some cleanup removing things that
have "always" been there!
> Right NOW we have something which works for most of the problems. What
> Mark is talking about would be adding in a few more defines to
> include/asm-ppc/bootinfo.h and using them. Not sort-of implementing
> what's been talked about and then do something better later.
If we replace bd_info now, we should keep all the entries it
Software Engineering: Embedded and Realtime Systems, Embedded Linux
Phone: (+49)-8142-4596-87 Fax: (+49)-8142-4596-88 Email: wd at denx.de
I used to be indecisive, now I'm not sure.
** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/
More information about the Linuxppc-dev