Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] make make quiet
Dear kenneth johansson, In message <1230625526.12143.24.ca...@duo> you wrote: > > For size reason this is a binary attachment. it uncompress to > 244227 bytes and max for this list is 100k BINARY ATTACHMENT IGNORED. PLEASE READ THE INSTRUCTIONS. Wolfgang Denk -- DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: w...@denx.de The existence of god implies a violation of causality. ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] make make quiet
On Tue, 2008-12-30 at 11:48 +0100, Wolfgang Denk wrote: > Dear kenneth johansson, > > In message <1230625526.12143.24.ca...@duo> you wrote: > > > > For size reason this is a binary attachment. it uncompress to > > 244227 bytes and max for this list is 100k > > BINARY ATTACHMENT IGNORED. > > PLEASE READ THE INSTRUCTIONS. THERE IS NO INSTRUCTIONS IN THE README IN U_BOOT FOR THE CASE LARGER THAN 100K PATCH. I HAVE BETTER THING TO DO WITH MY TIME THAN HUNT AROUND YOUR WEBSITE TRYING TO FIND INFORMATION I'M NOT EVEN SURE EXIST. ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] make make quiet
Dear kenneth johansson, In message <1230635276.17914.3.ca...@duo> you wrote: > > > PLEASE READ THE INSTRUCTIONS. > > THERE IS NO INSTRUCTIONS IN THE README IN U_BOOT FOR THE CASE LARGER > THAN 100K PATCH. Let me quote the README for you: | Submitting Patches: | --- | | Since the number of patches for U-Boot is growing, we need to | establish some rules. Submissions which do not conform to these rules | may be rejected, even when they contain important and valuable stuff. | | Patches shall be sent to the u-boot-users mailing list. | | Please see http://www.denx.de/wiki/U-Boot/Patches for details. > I HAVE BETTER THING TO DO WITH MY TIME THAN HUNT AROUND YOUR WEBSITE > TRYING TO FIND INFORMATION I'M NOT EVEN SURE EXIST. Looks like a pretty clear hint to me. Not much hunting around needed. Best regards, Wolfgang Denk -- DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: w...@denx.de They say a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, but it is not one half so bad as a lot of ignorance. - Terry Pratchett, _Equal Rites_ ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] make make quiet
Dear kenneth johansson, In message <1230636057.17914.5.ca...@duo> you wrote: > > Only print out the target name during make. > For old style set V=1 What is the rationale for this patch? I can see no real advantage with it. If you find the make output annoying, you can silence make by passing the "-s" flag. On the other hand, your patch braks building with "-s" - I get: $ make -s all grep: writing output: Broken pipe a - ppc_longjmp.o a - ppc_setjmp.o a - stubs.o a - bzlib.o a - bzlib_crctable.o a - bzlib_decompress.o a - bzlib_randtable.o a - bzlib_huffman.o a - crc16.o a - crc32.o a - ctype.o a - display_options.o a - div64.o a - gunzip.o a - lmb.o a - ldiv.o a - sha1.o a - string.o a - strmhz.o a - vsprintf.o a - zlib.o a - io.o a - firmware_sc_task_bestcomm.impl.o a - firmware_sc_task.impl.o a - i2c.o a - traps.o a - cpu.o a - cpu_init.o a - ide.o a - interrupts.o a - loadtask.o a - pci_mpc5200.o ... etc. Even without "-s" there are some errors for example when I try to build the "TQM5200" configuration. But most of all, your patch costs a lot of additional processes. Running "make all" for above configuration takes 2150 processes without your patch, and 2410 with it. And this does not even count the additional calls to shell builtins. Unless you have a really good reason why this patch should be applied, I tend to reject it. Best regards, Wolfgang Denk -- DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: w...@denx.de "Virtual" means never knowing where your next byte is coming from. ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] make make quiet
Wolfgang Denk wrote: > Dear kenneth johansson, > > In message <1230636057.17914.5.ca...@duo> you wrote: >> Only print out the target name during make. >> For old style set V=1 > > What is the rationale for this patch? I can see no real advantage with > it. > > If you find the make output annoying, you can silence make by passing > the "-s" flag. FWIW, I like the Linux-style non-verbose but not completely silent output. It shows what is being built without too much noise. It's useful for sanity checking that edits got saved, dependencies are working, etc. > But most of all, your patch costs a lot of additional processes. > Running "make all" for above configuration takes 2150 processes > without your patch, and 2410 with it. And this does not even count > the additional calls to shell builtins. Unix scripting is inefficient, news at 11. What's the actual time difference? -Scott ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] make make quiet
Dear Scott Wood, In message <495aa094.7030...@freescale.com> you wrote: > > Unix scripting is inefficient, news at 11. What's the actual time > difference? What's the actual advantage? Best regards, Wolfgang Denk -- DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: w...@denx.de When the ax entered the forest, the trees said, "The handle is one of us!" -- Turkish proverb ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] make make quiet
On Tuesday 30 December 2008 03:25:26 kenneth johansson wrote: > Only print out the target name during make. > For old style set V=1 your changelog summary "make make quiet" isnt really clear. it should be something along the lines of "make default build output simple like kbuild". -mike signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] make make quiet
On Tue, 2008-12-30 at 23:14 +0100, Wolfgang Denk wrote: > Dear kenneth johansson, > > In message <1230636057.17914.5.ca...@duo> you wrote: > > > > Only print out the target name during make. > > For old style set V=1 > > What is the rationale for this patch? I can see no real advantage with > it. To highlight warnings during build. It's just a way to make the default output less noise. > > If you find the make output annoying, you can silence make by passing > the "-s" flag. -s is a bit to much you get no feedback at all. > > On the other hand, your patch braks building with "-s" - I get: oops that was not intended. > Even without "-s" there are some errors for example when I try to > build the "TQM5200" configuration. with errors I guess you mean non optimal output. the patch really should not have any impact on the binaries built. If it really breaks the build that is a real problem and one I do not see in my test. > Unless you have a really good reason why this patch should be > applied, I tend to reject it. No it's only a way to remove most of the noise as mentioned it has no effect on u-boot itself. while it's a large patch it's mostly trivial search/replace so it's easy to remove should people object to it. But please try it out for a while and see what people think. My guess is that the amount of warnings showing up during build will be reduced over time with this type of feedback during build. here is a small addition to the patch fixing the issues with -s you found. --- diff --git a/board/tqc/tqm5200/Makefile b/board/tqc/tqm5200/Makefile index de0934b..b233e93 100644 --- a/board/tqc/tqm5200/Makefile +++ b/board/tqc/tqm5200/Makefile @@ -41,7 +41,7 @@ distclean:clean rm -f $(LIB) core *.bak $(obj).depend cam5200_flash.o: cam5200_flash.c - $(CC) $(CFLAGS) -fno-strict-aliasing -c -o $@ $< + $(QUIET_CC)$(CC) $(CFLAGS) -fno-strict-aliasing -c -o $@ $< # diff --git a/config.mk b/config.mk index 51a08e4..bab6ebb 100644 --- a/config.mk +++ b/config.mk @@ -214,10 +214,13 @@ ifndef V ARFLAGS = cr export V -endif -else #($(findstring $(MAKEFLAGS),s),s) -ARFLAGS = crv -endif +else + ARFLAGS = crv +endif # V + +else + ARFLAGS = cr +endif # ($(findstring $(MAKEFLAGS),s),s) ifndef REMOTE_BUILD diff --git a/post/Makefile b/post/Makefile index 74a0672..a7085ef 100644 --- a/post/Makefile +++ b/post/Makefile @@ -58,7 +58,7 @@ $(GPLIB): $(obj).depend $(OBJS) # specific POST libraries $(SPLIB): $(obj).depend postdeps - $(MAKE) -C $(dir $(subst $(obj),,$@)) + @$(MAKE) -C $(dir $(subst $(obj),,$@)) # the POST lib archive $(LIB): $(GPLIB) $(SPLIB) diff --git a/post/rules.mk b/post/rules.mk index 1efc9c7..5fcb2d2 100644 --- a/post/rules.mk +++ b/post/rules.mk @@ -34,7 +34,7 @@ CPPFLAGS += -I$(TOPDIR) all: $(LIB) $(LIB):$(obj).depend $(OBJS) - $(AR) $(ARFLAGS) $@ $(OBJS) + $(QUIET_AR)$(AR) $(ARFLAGS) $@ $(OBJS) # ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] make make quiet
On Wednesday 31 December 2008 04:23:53 kenneth johansson wrote: > On Tue, 2008-12-30 at 23:14 +0100, Wolfgang Denk wrote: > > Dear kenneth johansson, > > > > In message <1230636057.17914.5.ca...@duo> you wrote: > > > Only print out the target name during make. > > > For old style set V=1 > > > > What is the rationale for this patch? I can see no real advantage with > > it. > > To highlight warnings during build. It's just a way to make the default > output less noise. > > > If you find the make output annoying, you can silence make by passing > > the "-s" flag. > > -s is a bit to much you get no feedback at all. you may want to include this kind of "usage" in the changelog > with errors I guess you mean non optimal output. the patch really should > not have any impact on the binaries built. If it really breaks the build > that is a real problem and one I do not see in my test. i dont really like how the changes are integrated. it'll require constant maintenance to add these QUIET prefix vars. is there a reason we cant go the opposite direction and set CC/etc... directly ? or try unifying things with patterns ? i.e. drop all of the $(AR) calls in board/*/Makefile and replace it with a toplevel pattern kind of like: %.a: %.o $(AR) $(ARFLAGS) $^ -o $@ -mike signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] make make quiet
On Wed, 2008-12-31 at 04:46 -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote: > i dont really like how the changes are integrated. it'll require constant > maintenance to add these QUIET prefix vars. is there a reason we cant go the > opposite direction and set CC/etc... directly ? or try unifying things with > patterns ? You really do not want CC AR and friends expand to anything else than the program name. It will only lead to confusion. except the AR stuff that has been copied all over the place there really is not that many places that has been changed and as far as maintenance goes there is none. People doing changes to makefiles simply cut & past from whats already there so this "style" will propagate by itself. > > i.e. drop all of the $(AR) calls in board/*/Makefile and replace it with a > toplevel pattern kind of like: > %.a: %.o > $(AR) $(ARFLAGS) $^ -o $@ > -mike sure but that would be a separate changeset. I was trying to keep the change as small as possible. ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] make make quiet
On Wednesday 31 December 2008 05:06:51 kenneth johansson wrote: > On Wed, 2008-12-31 at 04:46 -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote: > > i.e. drop all of the $(AR) calls in board/*/Makefile and replace it with > > a toplevel pattern kind of like: > > %.a: %.o > > $(AR) $(ARFLAGS) $^ -o $@ > > sure but that would be a separate changeset. I was trying to keep the > change as small as possible. those two statements dont make sense together ... if you unify the boards first, then the resulting "quiet" patch is a lot smaller. -mike signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] make make quiet
On Wed, 2008-12-31 at 06:15 -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote: > On Wednesday 31 December 2008 05:06:51 kenneth johansson wrote: > > On Wed, 2008-12-31 at 04:46 -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote: > > > i.e. drop all of the $(AR) calls in board/*/Makefile and replace it with > > > a toplevel pattern kind of like: > > > %.a: %.o > > > $(AR) $(ARFLAGS) $^ -o $@ > > > > sure but that would be a separate changeset. I was trying to keep the > > change as small as possible. > > those two statements dont make sense together ... if you unify the boards > first, then the resulting "quiet" patch is a lot smaller. > -mike :) I did not mean the size of the patch I meant the impact of the change how easy it is to follow what has happened. But if you do a rule for the library consolidation that works I'm happy to rebase my changes on top of that. I'm not going to do the lib stuff myself though. ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] make make quiet
Dear kenneth johansson, In message <1230715433.19628.12.ca...@duo> you wrote: > > > If you find the make output annoying, you can silence make by passing > > the "-s" flag. > > -s is a bit to much you get no feedback at all. But that's the preferred way of doing things, at least according to Unix Philosophy. No news is good news. Running a "./MAKEALL " on a somewhat decent machine takes no more than 10...20 seconds. Either you get warnings / error messages, or not. What else is needed? > > On the other hand, your patch braks building with "-s" - I get: > > oops that was not intended. > > > Even without "-s" there are some errors for example when I try to > > build the "TQM5200" configuration. > > with errors I guess you mean non optimal output. the patch really should No, with errors I mean things like "grep: writing output: Broken pipe". > > Unless you have a really good reason why this patch should be > > applied, I tend to reject it. > > No it's only a way to remove most of the noise as mentioned it has no > effect on u-boot itself. If you want to have a silent build (which I do almost always, too), then either use "./MAKEALL " or "make -s". > while it's a large patch it's mostly trivial search/replace so it's easy > to remove should people object to it. I diasgree. The changes are far from trivial. > here is a small addition to the patch fixing the issues with -s you > found. I think your appraoch (and that of kbuild, too) is fundamentally broken. Fixing this on the Makefile level is at least one level to far up. If you really want a verbosity level of make that is between no options (normal case) and no output (except warnings/errors, as with -s), then this should be implemnted within make itself, as a new make option.Then you have the changes in one place only, and each and every software package can benefit from it. Modifying hundrets of Makefiles here and there and then again for each new software package makes absolutely no sense to me. U-Boot is the wrong place to fix this. Please fix this in make, for the benefit of others, too. Best regards, Wolfgang Denk -- DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: w...@denx.de Substitute "damn" every time you're inclined to write "very"; your editor will delete it and the writing will be just as it should be. - Mark Twain ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] make make quiet
On Wed, Dec 31, 2008 at 08:47:54PM +0100, Wolfgang Denk wrote: > Dear kenneth johansson, > > In message <1230715433.19628.12.ca...@duo> you wrote: > > > > > If you find the make output annoying, you can silence make by passing > > > the "-s" flag. > > > > -s is a bit to much you get no feedback at all. > > But that's the preferred way of doing things, at least according to > Unix Philosophy. Let's not get so bogged down in following some overgeneralized philosophy that we ignore the preferences of users. Besides, if you really wanted the build to be like a typical Unix tool, shouldn't -s be default, and verbose an option? Patches of this sort get closer to that. Most people don't use -s, and this will make more people see warnings. > > > Unless you have a really good reason why this patch should be > > > applied, I tend to reject it. > > > > No it's only a way to remove most of the noise as mentioned it has no > > effect on u-boot itself. > > If you want to have a silent build (which I do almost always, too), > then either use "./MAKEALL " or "make -s". I don't want a silent build, I want a non-excessively-verbose build. > U-Boot is the wrong place to fix this. Please fix this in make, for > the benefit of others, too. Hmm, the best make could reasonably do on its own would be to print the name of each target, but that could get cluttered with intermediate and fake targets. While such an option would be very nice, I don't think it should preclude makefile support for nicer output. -Scott ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] make make quiet
Hello All, My 2 cents: (I am NOT trying to start a flame war, although I understand how sensitive this subject is) > I think your appraoch (and that of kbuild, too) is fundamentally > broken. Maybe the configure structure, like u-boot has, that is so complex, so hard to customise, so error prone, and were relations between options is so unclear from the users perspective, is fundamentally broken ;-))) I thought of it before to integrate Kconfig/kbuild and friends in U-boot, but I got the impression back then that it would have a very small chance of being ever accepted, so I did not invest much time in it... So, I really like the kbuild/kconfig method to handle such a large amount of ifdefs options included the method of documenting the options. Hmm, that sounds like what u-boot-v2 is doing, and I wonder sometimes if it would exist at all if u-boot was using a different make structure? I think it is a pity that it separated in the first place, but that is a different discussion... > Fixing this on the Makefile level is at least one level to > far up. If you really want a verbosity level of make that is between > no options (normal case) and no output (except warnings/errors, as > with -s), then this should be implemnted within make itself, as a new > make option.Then you have the changes in one place only, and each and > every software package can benefit from it. Modifying hundrets of > Makefiles here and there and then again for each new software package > makes absolutely no sense to me. Maybe the linux makefile structure is a much better approach :-))) (in that case even weak-linking could work properly) BTW: Kenneth is silent already for 5 days on this discussion, is he being scared off? Kind Regards, Remy ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] make make quiet
Dear Scott, In message <20090105195311.ga24...@ld0162-tx32.am.freescale.net> you wrote: > > > But that's the preferred way of doing things, at least according to > > Unix Philosophy. > > Let's not get so bogged down in following some overgeneralized philosophy > that we ignore the preferences of users. Well, users are often in dire need to learn about the philosophical background of a design. > Besides, if you really wanted the build to be like a typical Unix tool, > shouldn't -s be default, and verbose an option? Patches of this sort get > closer to that. I have to admit that I almost always just run "./MAKEALL boardname", which actually is as silent as "-s" (but it stores the *full* log in case anything goes wrong). > Most people don't use -s, and this will make more people see warnings. Most people don;t use out of tree building either, and most people never run MAKEALL, not even before submitting patches. That's the line of "a billion flies can't be wrong, you know. > > U-Boot is the wrong place to fix this. Please fix this in make, for > > the benefit of others, too. > > Hmm, the best make could reasonably do on its own would be to print the > name of each target, but that could get cluttered with intermediate and > fake targets. While such an option would be very nice, I don't think it > should preclude makefile support for nicer output. "make" knows exactly when it is running $(CC) or $(AS) or $(AR) or $(LD) etc., so it can do automatically what now everybody is adding to a zillion of innocent Makefiles. Sorry, but the make process is complicated enough without this fancy stuff. Every now and then it shows funny behaviour. Just searcht he archives for obscure build errors on ext3 but not on NFS or vice versa. If ther eis a real "make" expert here, there are many better places to invest efforts for improvement. A semi-silent build is far, far down on th list. Best regards, Wolfgang Denk -- DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: w...@denx.de "In the long run, every program becomes rococo, and then rubble." - Alan Perlis ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] make make quiet
Dear Remy, In message <3efb10970901051230w654dc1d0w2fbf878ca853c...@mail.gmail.com> you wrote: > > > I think your appraoch (and that of kbuild, too) is fundamentally > > broken. > > Maybe the configure structure, like u-boot has, that is so complex, so > hard to customise, so error prone, and were relations between options > is so unclear from the users perspective, is fundamentally broken > ;-))) It may be broken (or at least in need of imprevement), too. But that doesn't contradict my statement. > I thought of it before to integrate Kconfig/kbuild and friends in > U-boot, but I got the impression back then that it would have a very > small chance of being ever accepted, so I did not invest much time in > it... You know that Jean-Christophe is working on this, don't you? > > Fixing this on the Makefile level is at least one level to > > far up. If you really want a verbosity level of make that is between > > no options (normal case) and no output (except warnings/errors, as > > with -s), then this should be implemnted within make itself, as a new > > make option.Then you have the changes in one place only, and each and > > every software package can benefit from it. Modifying hundrets of > > Makefiles here and there and then again for each new software package > > makes absolutely no sense to me. > > Maybe the linux makefile structure is a much better approach :-))) > (in that case even weak-linking could work properly) No, please don't mix things up here. There are already quite a lot of tools out there which use such a "silencing" in their Makefiles. And more and more do it. So it cannot ba a bad thing, he? But wait - it is a very basic principle of software design *not* to do the same thing again and again and from scratch in every new project. It is good design to do this just *once*, at the right place where it provides the required function for all those looking for that feature. If semi-silent output from a Makefile is wanted, then the "make" tool itself is the correct place to add this feature. Adding it to a zillion Makefiles in many different projects is very fundamentally broken. Best regards, Wolfgang Denk -- DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: w...@denx.de egrep patterns are full regular expressions; it uses a fast determi- nistic algorithm that sometimes needs exponential space. - unix manuals ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] make make quiet
On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 12:20:57PM +0100, kenneth johansson wrote: > > Only print out the target name during make. > For old style set V=1 > > > Signed-off-by: kenneth johansson Sidenote: u-boot-v2 uses the standard Linux build system and has quiet operation as the default case. rsc -- Pengutronix e.K. | | Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0| Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917- | ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
