Wolfgang Denk <w...@denx.de> wrote on 2010-04-01 15:05:29: > > Dear Joakim Tjernlund, > > In message <OF6D501B3A.40F7E6A2-ONC12576F8.00466BE2-C12576F8. > 00471...@transmode.se> you wrote: > > > > > I don't think you ever posted this before. I cannot find any trace of > > > such a patch - not in the public archives nor locally. > > > > I think I did, but this would have been late 2001 or 2002 I think :) > > Not 100% sure about the date since the old CVS log looks a bit fishy > > after the repo got converted to Subversion. > > Ah... that was at PPCBoot times, then. Found it: > Tue, 11 Sep 2001 15:29:26 +0200
Wow, you got your archives in order :) > > AFAICT the patch was late for a release, but has not been formally > rejected. Probably just got forgotten. Ah, I must have misunderstood then. > > > > Hm... will this not make escaping impossible? Assume you want to pass > > > > > > arg=${name} > > > > > > to Linux. How would you escape this so it does NOT get expanded if > > > you run process_macros() arbitrarily often? > > > > Possibly, I never needed that though. > > One would probably need to add an escape char for that. Something > > like arg=\${name} > > Woudn't this then just cause another cycle through process_macros(), > where it then gets substitured anyway? [Guess I gotta try this out.] I am not sure what will happen, it was so man years ago. But I would guess that if you really want to pass arg=$(name) to the kernel you will probably need to do some adjustment. Jocke _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot