Dear Albert ARIBAUD, In message <20130118092041.0c827374@lilith> you wrote: > > > This series so far covers the introduction of a IP6addr_t and > > printing/parsing of addresses. > > As a general comment, I heartily welcome IPv6 support (even though I
Me too! :-) > but I wonder how this fits in with the general line of not adding dead > code in U-Boot. Will we make an exception for IPv6 and accept this RFC > once it is officially submitted? Or do we collect small, reviewable > RFCs for various IPv6 aspects but apply them in one go? Or do we create > a branch or tree where IPv6 will get integrated step by step until > solid enough for mainline inclusion? Or was this decided already and I > missed it? My understanding was that this patch set was for reviewing purposes only (hence RFC). Your dead code hint is absolutely correct: for integration into mainline we need users of the code, i. e. for example DHCP and TFTP support... 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 C++ was an interesting and valuable experiment, but we've learned its lessons and it's time to move on. - Peter Curran in <dcqm4z....@isgtec.com> _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot