On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 05:18:55PM -0800, Simon Glass wrote: > Hi Tom, > > On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 5:03 PM, Tom Rini <tr...@ti.com> wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 12:14:00AM +0100, Wolfgang Denk wrote: > >> Dear Tom Rini, > >> > >> In message <20121219225945.GF14589@bill-the-cat> you wrote: > >> > > >> ... > >> > With this change, applied to u-boot/master. > >> > >> Argh.... :-( > >> > >> Can we please undo this somehow? This does not fit at all > >> conceptually. U-Boot is supposed to use the good ols UNIX philosophy > >> of being terse by default, and special casing one specific storage > >> device makes no sense at all to me. > > > > We need to fix some of the underlying problems so that we're consistent > > here. Sometimes we have output (network #), sometimes we don't. > > Sometimes we have a speed (network, filesystem load), sometimes we > > don't. I'd be quite happy to have a uniform output and a uniform ON/OFF > > switch. > > I'm happy to do something like this. Obviously we want a config, but > do we also want an env variable to control it? Could be useful.
The biggest blocker I see is that we should start the series by re-orging things, if we can, so that we don't have this code in N places. > And at the risk of killing it with feature creep, perhaps we could > have two levels of verbosity: progress (which repeatedly updates on > the same line) and notice (which does not). That might take care of > Jagannadha's use case also. If we can do it such that it's (a) clean looking and (b) build-time configurable too, I don't see why we can't give it a look at least. -- Tom
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
