On Thu, Oct 21, 2021 at 11:50:02AM +0200, Wolfgang Denk wrote: > Dear Simon, > > In message > <20211019164418.v9.3.Ie78bfbfca0d01d9cba501e127f446ec48e1f7afe@changeid> you > wrote: > > At present U-Boot environment variables, and thus scripts, are defined > > by CONFIG_EXTRA_ENV_SETTINGS. It is painful to add large amounts of text > > to this file and dealing with quoting and newlines is harder than it > > should be. It would be better if we could just type the script into a > > text file and have it included by U-Boot. > > > > Add a feature that brings in a .env file associated with the board > > config, if present. To use it, create a file in a board/<vendor> > > directory, typically called <board>.env and controlled by the > > CONFIG_ENV_SOURCE_FILE option. > > > > The environment variables should be of the form "var=value". Values can > > extend to multiple lines. See the README under 'Environment Variables:' > > for more information and an example. Note that variables names may > > not end in + due to the += syntax below. > > I still object to placing new, arbitrary restrictions on what may or > may not be used in environment variable names. > > We have discussed alternative implementations, and trivial changes > like using "=+" instead of "+=" as append operator do not require > such restictions. > > Thus, and only for the restictions on variable names: > > Naked-by: Wolfgang Denk <w...@denx.de>
Do you have any other feedback on the entire rest of the series? Because I'm not sure the benefit of "we can still support '+' at the end of a variable name, if anyone uses that" outweighs "we can more easily append variables in constructing our environment without relying on uncommon operators". To me "=+" as the append syntax is worse than "no + at the end of your variables". -- Tom
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
