Dear Sean,
In message you wrote:
>
...
> And yet, this is not the field we compete in. While bourne-style shells
> can take advantage of a multi-threaded environment, embedded shells tend
> to implement a much wider set of languages. See [1] for a survey of
> examples.
>
> [1] https://github.com
On 7/6/21 3:50 AM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
Dear Sean,
In message <7143cb1e-4061-3034-57b9-1a12753fa...@gmail.com> you wrote:
You complain that the existing port of hus has a number of severe
limitations or bugs which have long been fixed upstream,
The bugs are fairly minor. The particular cha
On Wed, Jul 07, 2021 at 10:16:13AM +0200, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Tom,
>
> In message <20210706153327.GS9516@bill-the-cat> you wrote:
> >
> > > Mature? And still without consequent error checking? And done,
> > > i. e. this will never be fixed?
> >
> > Intentional design by upstream, and t
Dear Tom,
In message <20210706153327.GS9516@bill-the-cat> you wrote:
>
> > Mature? And still without consequent error checking? And done,
> > i. e. this will never be fixed?
>
> Intentional design by upstream, and then for the actual problem part
> (error checking, test suite), Sean is saying
On 7/6/2021 6:33 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
Mature? And still without consequent error checking? And done,
i. e. this will never be fixed?
Intentional design by upstream, and then for the actual problem part
(error checking, test suite), Sean is saying he'll fix it, and has
started on it.
To clar
On Tue, Jul 06, 2021 at 09:52:56AM +0200, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Tom,
>
> In message <20210705185141.GA9516@bill-the-cat> you wrote:
> >
> > I think I want to try and address this. While with "hush" we have
> > something that's in heavy active development outside of U-Boot, with LIL
> > we
Hi Wolfgang,
On Tue, 6 Jul 2021 at 01:53, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
>
> Dear Tom,
>
> In message <20210705185141.GA9516@bill-the-cat> you wrote:
> >
> > I think I want to try and address this. While with "hush" we have
> > something that's in heavy active development outside of U-Boot, with LIL
> > w
Dear Tom,
In message <20210705185141.GA9516@bill-the-cat> you wrote:
>
> I think I want to try and address this. While with "hush" we have
> something that's in heavy active development outside of U-Boot, with LIL
> we have something that's mature and "done".
Mature? And still without conseque
Dear Sean,
In message <7143cb1e-4061-3034-57b9-1a12753fa...@gmail.com> you wrote:
> >
> > You complain that the existing port of hus has a number of severe
> > limitations or bugs which have long been fixed upstream,
>
> The bugs are fairly minor. The particular characteristics of Hush have
> no
On Mon, Jul 05, 2021 at 03:02:24PM -0600, Simon Glass wrote:
> Hi Tom,
>
> On Mon, 5 Jul 2021 at 12:51, Tom Rini wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Jul 05, 2021 at 07:58:18PM +0200, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> > > Dear Sean,
> > >
> > > In message you wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Is your intent to create a fork of t
Hi Tom,
On Mon, 5 Jul 2021 at 12:51, Tom Rini wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jul 05, 2021 at 07:58:18PM +0200, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> > Dear Sean,
> >
> > In message you wrote:
> > >
> > > > Is your intent to create a fork of this in U-Boot?
> > >
> > > Yes. I believe some of the major additions I have made
On 7/5/21 1:58 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
Dear Sean,
In message you wrote:
Is your intent to create a fork of this in U-Boot?
Yes. I believe some of the major additions I have made (especially "[RFC
PATCH 21/28] cli: lil: Add a distinct parsing step") would not be
accepted by upstream.
Ouc
On Mon, Jul 05, 2021 at 07:58:18PM +0200, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Sean,
>
> In message you wrote:
> >
> > > Is your intent to create a fork of this in U-Boot?
> >
> > Yes. I believe some of the major additions I have made (especially "[RFC
> > PATCH 21/28] cli: lil: Add a distinct parsing st
Dear Sean,
In message you wrote:
>
> > Is your intent to create a fork of this in U-Boot?
>
> Yes. I believe some of the major additions I have made (especially "[RFC
> PATCH 21/28] cli: lil: Add a distinct parsing step") would not be
> accepted by upstream.
Ouch...
> > Could we not update thi
On 7/5/21 11:29 AM, Simon Glass wrote:
Hi Sean,
On Thu, 1 Jul 2021 at 00:16, Sean Anderson wrote:
Several functions have different names than they do in TCL. To make things
easier for those familiar with TCL, rename them to their TCL equivalents.
At the moment, this is only done for functions
Hi Sean,
On Thu, 1 Jul 2021 at 00:16, Sean Anderson wrote:
>
> Several functions have different names than they do in TCL. To make things
> easier for those familiar with TCL, rename them to their TCL equivalents.
> At the moment, this is only done for functions not used by LIL_FULL. Some
> funct
Several functions have different names than they do in TCL. To make things
easier for those familiar with TCL, rename them to their TCL equivalents.
At the moment, this is only done for functions not used by LIL_FULL. Some
functions need more substantive work to conform them to TCL. For example,
in
17 matches
Mail list logo
