On Mon, 18 Jul 2011 23:31:43 +0200 Carl-Daniel Hailfinger <[email protected]> wrote:
> Am 18.07.2011 14:13 schrieb Stefan Tauner: > > thanks to Florian Zumbiehl for reporting > > this (http://paste.flashrom.org/view.php?id=707). > > Can you credit him in the changelog? Thanks! sure > > carldani: you wrote you did not fix the -l/-i ordering problem "because > > the new layout code may have different requirements anyway". > > the first step to fix this is to extract the needed file and region > > names from the command line (to use them after the parsing loop has > > finished). this is somewhat independent from whatever we do with the > > arguments then. if you agree i would like to fix this now (i did not > > look for what is needed exactly yet), if not you can just ack the patch. > > > > The flashrom-chromium tree has a workaround for that. The issue here is > that there can be an unlimited number of -i parameters, so you have to > either create an array layout_images[] or build a combined string which > needs to be split up afterwards. I think one variant is done by the > chromium tree. That said, my long-term hope is to allow only one -i > parameter which is split like the programmer parameters with ",". > > It all boils down to whether we want to provide the best possible user > experience at the cost of an ugly hack or if we want to avoid such a > hack and move to the new layout commandline interface after 0.9.4. With > r1373 and your bugfix on top (which should be committed now regardless > of whether we hack around the -i limitation or not) the silent > corruption is fixed. i think multiple -i switches are very nice for the users and us. creating a growing array by reallocing a new slot at each -i occurrence does not sound so bad too me. parsing a long -i string OTOH isn't so nice, although it is matching current -p behavior better. > Side note: Should we check for each flashrom parameter (except -V) if it > was specified more than once? probably. although it is an unnecessary limitation in the case it is clear to do anyway (e.g. -ww is not really a problem). OTOH it indicates the use either does not know what he is doing or he does but does not care much. :) > > Signed-off-by: Stefan Tauner <[email protected]> > > > Acked-by: Carl-Daniel Hailfinger <[email protected]> thanks, committed in r1374 -- Kind regards/Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Stefan Tauner _______________________________________________ flashrom mailing list [email protected] http://www.flashrom.org/mailman/listinfo/flashrom
