On 3/2/20 5:38 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote: > ----- Am 3. Feb 2020 um 7:12 schrieb Chris Johns chr...@rtems.org: > >> On 3/2/20 4:21 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote: >>> ----- Am 3. Feb 2020 um 1:14 schrieb Chris Johns chr...@rtems.org: >>> >>>> On 2/2/20 1:28 am, Sebastian Huber wrote: >>>>> ----- Am 20. Jan 2020 um 6:01 schrieb Chris Johns chr...@rtems.org: >>>>> >>>>>> On 17/12/19 4:57 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote: >>>>>>> My experience tells me that doing a BSP development without a debugger >>>>>>> is a >>>>>>> waste of time. >>>>>> >>>>>> Sometimes getting a working debugger is more effort than getting a BSP >>>>>> to work. >>>>>> The Pi is an example. I believe Alan used print statements. >>>>> >>>>> Ok, what do you think about a new configuration option: >>>>> >>>>> CONFIGURE_ENABLE_VERBOSE_INITIALIZATION >>>> >>>> CONFIGURE_ENABLE_VERBOSE_SYS_INIT ? >>> >>> In v2 of the patch set I named it CONFIGURE_VERBOSE_INITIALIZATION. I am >>> not in >>> favour of abbreviations, since they are in general not used in the >>> configuration options. >> >> Sure. >> >>> More precise would be CONFIGURE_VERBOSE_SYSTEM_INITIALIZATION. It is >>> longer, but >>> would be not the longest configuration option name (e.g. >>> CONFIGURE_APPLICATION_NEEDS_CONSOLE_DRIVER is longer). So, what about this >>> one? >> >> Yes CONFIGURE_VERBOSE_SYSTEM_INITIALIZATION is OK, the original could imply >> more >> to a new user. > > Ok, I will change the name to CONFIGURE_VERBOSE_SYSTEM_INITIALIZATION. > Anything else which needs to be addressed before I push the patch set?
I do not think so. Thanks. Chris _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@rtems.org http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
