On 18:11 Wed 09 Jul , Detlev Zundel wrote: > Hi Magnus and Jens, > > >> Basically, I agree. But would you accept the current patch for now? The new > >> routines and macros later could be implemented later. > > > > I don't think it's up to me to ACK or NAK this, but I can accept the > > current patch. > > Yes, this decision is up to the custodian. But lets be honest here, we > all know what "we can implement this later" means. > > We really need to fix problems as they arise. Especially in this case I > don't think that it is such a significant effort to fix it now. Fixing > it later will only need even more effort. > > Usually this effort(t-[detection time]) is an exponential function and I > am not kidding on this.
I fully agree with you. We need to fix this and not use a workaround which will became the status quo. Best Regards, J. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sponsored by: SourceForge.net Community Choice Awards: VOTE NOW! Studies have shown that voting for your favorite open source project, along with a healthy diet, reduces your potential for chronic lameness and boredom. Vote Now at http://www.sourceforge.net/community/cca08 _______________________________________________ U-Boot-Users mailing list U-Boot-Users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/u-boot-users
