Dear Paul,
in message <4ac4b612.7020...@windriver.com> you wrote:
>
> > So beause (1) it is the behaviour users might be used to, (2) I see
> > use cases for this and (3) adding a new option will allow to have both
> > beheaviours so anybody can chose what he wants, I think we should do
> > as I s
Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Paul Gortmaker,
>
> In message <4ac3c540.9050...@windriver.com> you wrote:
>> If you still think it is best to maintain current behaviour
>> and not stop after the 1st error, that is fine, I can do that,
>> but I just wanted to be sure it was clear why I did it this
>>
Dear Paul Gortmaker,
In message <4ac3c540.9050...@windriver.com> you wrote:
>
> If you still think it is best to maintain current behaviour
> and not stop after the 1st error, that is fine, I can do that,
> but I just wanted to be sure it was clear why I did it this
> way.
I have used the code ma
Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Paul Gortmaker,
>
> In message <1254338488-15332-1-git-send-email-paul.gortma...@windriver.com>
> you wrote:
>> The basic memtest function tries to watch for ^C after each
>> pattern pass as an escape mechanism, but if things are horribly
>> wrong, we'll be stuck in an
Dear Paul Gortmaker,
In message <1254338488-15332-1-git-send-email-paul.gortma...@windriver.com> you
wrote:
> The basic memtest function tries to watch for ^C after each
> pattern pass as an escape mechanism, but if things are horribly
> wrong, we'll be stuck in an inner loop flooding the console
The basic memtest function tries to watch for ^C after each
pattern pass as an escape mechanism, but if things are horribly
wrong, we'll be stuck in an inner loop flooding the console with
error messages and never check for ^C. To make matters worse,
if the user waits for all the error messages to
6 matches
Mail list logo
