Dear Alessandro Zummo,
In message <20090508180944.1304a...@i1501.lan.towertech.it> you wrote:
> On Fri, 8 May 2009 09:53:20 -0600
> Grant Likely wrote:
>
> > That is fine by me, but since it is known that it will eventually
> > support both, I'd like it to be renamed to 5xxx before it is merged
On Fri, 8 May 2009 09:53:20 -0600
Grant Likely wrote:
> That is fine by me, but since it is known that it will eventually
> support both, I'd like it to be renamed to 5xxx before it is merged to
> avoid a later rename patch.
or 52xx ?
--
Best regards,
Alessandro Zummo,
Tower Technologie
On Fri, 8 May 2009 09:53:20 -0600
Grant Likely wrote:
> That is fine by me, but since it is known that it will eventually
> support both, I'd like it to be renamed to 5xxx before it is merged to
> avoid a later rename patch.
sorry, forget my last email, I misread the codes.
--
Best regards,
On Thu, May 7, 2009 at 8:41 PM, John Rigby wrote:
> Can we get 5121 support in and add 5200 support later? They are not
> identical.
That is fine by me, but since it is known that it will eventually
support both, I'd like it to be renamed to 5xxx before it is merged to
avoid a later rename patch
Can we get 5121 support in and add 5200 support later? They are not
identical.
On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 4:40 PM, Grant Likely wrote:
>
> On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 3:06 PM, Wolfram Sang
> wrote:
> > On Wed, May 06, 2009 at 10:15:17PM +0200, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> >> From: John Rigby
> >>
> >> Based
