On May 1, 2009, at 6:47 AM, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 07:44:48AM -0500, Kumar Gala wrote:
>>
>> On Apr 21, 2009, at 3:52 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
>>
>>> Dear Kumar Gala,
>>>
>>> In message <93A8F58D-8C13-4F72-AFF3-
>>> cf4fdf9a3...@kernel.crashing.org> you wrote:
> In
On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 07:44:48AM -0500, Kumar Gala wrote:
>
> On Apr 21, 2009, at 3:52 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
>
> >Dear Kumar Gala,
> >
> >In message <93A8F58D-8C13-4F72-AFF3-
> >cf4fdf9a3...@kernel.crashing.org> you wrote:
> >>
> >>>In my experience, I tend to search for board names first.
On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 07:44:48AM -0500, Kumar Gala wrote:
>
> On Apr 21, 2009, at 3:52 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
>
> >Dear Kumar Gala,
> >
> >In message <93A8F58D-8C13-4F72-AFF3-
> >cf4fdf9a3...@kernel.crashing.org> you wrote:
> >>
> >>>In my experience, I tend to search for board names first.
On Apr 21, 2009, at 3:52 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Kumar Gala,
>
> In message <93A8F58D-8C13-4F72-AFF3-
> cf4fdf9a3...@kernel.crashing.org> you wrote:
>>
>>> In my experience, I tend to search for board names first.
>>
>> So back to the root of my question, do we just have one really long
On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 07:22:31PM -0400, Jon Smirl wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 7:14 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> > Dear Jon Smirl,
> >
> > In message <9e4733910904211533s58df5764na715986b36824...@mail.gmail.com>
> > you wrote:
> >>
> >> >> - for those who look for a board name, we should supp
Jon Smirl wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 7:14 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
>
>> Dear Jon Smirl,
>>
>> In message <9e4733910904211533s58df5764na715986b36824...@mail.gmail.com> you
>> wrote:
>>
> - for those who look for a board name, we should support this,
> probably wih an initial
On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 7:14 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Jon Smirl,
>
> In message <9e4733910904211533s58df5764na715986b36824...@mail.gmail.com> you
> wrote:
>>
>> >> - for those who look for a board name, we should support this,
>> >> probably wih an initial selection by the first letter (c
Dear Jon Smirl,
In message <9e4733910904211533s58df5764na715986b36824...@mail.gmail.com> you
wrote:
>
> >> - for those who look for a board name, we should support this,
> >> probably wih an initial selection by the first letter (case
> >> insensitive) of the board name.
> >>
> >> like this:
On Apr 21, 2009, at 5:59 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Kumar,
>
> In message acf6ca567...@kernel.crashing.org> you wrote:
>>
>>> I'm not an expert for the capabilities of Kconfig, but one looong
>>> list
>>> with hundrets of entries clearly makes no sense. We obviously need
>>> sum
>>> gro
Dear Kumar,
In message you wrote:
>
> > I'm not an expert for the capabilities of Kconfig, but one looong list
> > with hundrets of entries clearly makes no sense. We obviously need sum
> > grouping / structuring.
> >
> > IMHO there should be several options:
> >
> > - for those who look for a b
On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 5:05 PM, Kumar Gala wrote:
>
> On Apr 21, 2009, at 3:52 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
>
>> Dear Kumar Gala,
>>
>> In message <93a8f58d-8c13-4f72-aff3-cf4fdf9a3...@kernel.crashing.org> you
>> wrote:
>>>
In my experience, I tend to search for board names first.
>>>
>>> So bac
On Apr 21, 2009, at 3:52 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Kumar Gala,
>
> In message <93A8F58D-8C13-4F72-AFF3-
> cf4fdf9a3...@kernel.crashing.org> you wrote:
>>
>>> In my experience, I tend to search for board names first.
>>
>> So back to the root of my question, do we just have one really long
Dear Kumar Gala,
In message <93a8f58d-8c13-4f72-aff3-cf4fdf9a3...@kernel.crashing.org> you wrote:
>
> > In my experience, I tend to search for board names first.
>
> So back to the root of my question, do we just have one really long
> list of board names?
I'm not an expert for the capabiliti
On Apr 21, 2009, at 3:02 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Jon Smirl,
>
> In message
> <9e4733910904210841n6c7f0db5s57eee23520dc...@mail.gmail.com> you
> wrote:
>>
>> My vote would be to require all boards in the board/ directory to be
>> in a vendor directory. When you buy the board it is pre
Dear Jon Smirl,
In message <9e4733910904210841n6c7f0db5s57eee23520dc...@mail.gmail.com> you
wrote:
>
> My vote would be to require all boards in the board/ directory to be
> in a vendor directory. When you buy the board it is pretty obvious
> from the accompanying packaging/manuals who the vendo
Dear Jon Smirl,
In message <9e4733910904210833u79f3d4dfv2db7449162462...@mail.gmail.com> you
wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 10:25 AM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> > Dear Jon Smirl,
> >
> > In message <9e4733910904201706u58387d5fod231dd4b8ac88...@mail.gmail.com>
> you wrote:
> >>
> >> Everyone will k
Jon Smirl wrote:
> My vote would be to require all boards in the board/ directory to be
> in a vendor directory. When you buy the board it is pretty obvious
> from the accompanying packaging/manuals who the vendor is.
Companies and product lines get bought, names change...
IMHO, architecture (s
On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 10:27 AM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Jon Smirl,
>
> In message <9e4733910904201712x68658ddfk3c18298deb82b...@mail.gmail.com> you
> wrote:
>>
>> There are a lot of boards that could be moved into a vendor subdirs. I
>> suspect we have less than 100 vendors. Maybe as few as
On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 10:25 AM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Jon Smirl,
>
> In message <9e4733910904201706u58387d5fod231dd4b8ac88...@mail.gmail.com> you
> wrote:
>>
>> Everyone will know the vendor of their board. You could alphabetize
>
> Really? So who is the board vendor for the MPC8360 board
> So should we leave the nomadik as a single-entry vendor board
> or leave it as is?
Argh!
I mean: leave it alone in its own vendor-dir or move it up one level?
I got the idea vendor dirs were preferred anyway (as suggested by JC),
but Wolfgang's last message suggests the opposite.
Sorry for mis
> There is many vendors which have just a single board;
Like the ST nomadik8815 I maintain.
> Just adding an additional directory level for a single entry does
> not make much sense to me.
So should we leave the nomadik as a single-entry vendor board
or leave it as is? (more nomadik boards will
Dear Jon Smirl,
In message <9e4733910904201712x68658ddfk3c18298deb82b...@mail.gmail.com> you
wrote:
>
> There are a lot of boards that could be moved into a vendor subdirs. I
> suspect we have less than 100 vendors. Maybe as few as 60.
There is many vendors which have just a single board; also,
Dear Jon Smirl,
In message <9e4733910904201706u58387d5fod231dd4b8ac88...@mail.gmail.com> you
wrote:
>
> Everyone will know the vendor of their board. You could alphabetize
Really? So who is the board vendor for the MPC8360 board? Freescale or
Logic PD? And who is the vendor for the ADS5121? Fre
Jon Smirl wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 8:06 PM, Jon Smirl wrote:
>> On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 7:57 PM, Kumar Gala
>> wrote:
>>> On Apr 20, 2009, at 5:01 PM, Jon Smirl wrote:
>>>
On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 5:11 PM, Kumar Gala
wrote:
> In chatting w/Wolfgang on IRC he felt that we sh
On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 8:06 PM, Jon Smirl wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 7:57 PM, Kumar Gala wrote:
>>
>> On Apr 20, 2009, at 5:01 PM, Jon Smirl wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 5:11 PM, Kumar Gala
>>> wrote:
In chatting w/Wolfgang on IRC he felt that we should maintain the
>>>
On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 7:57 PM, Kumar Gala wrote:
>
> On Apr 20, 2009, at 5:01 PM, Jon Smirl wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 5:11 PM, Kumar Gala
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> In chatting w/Wolfgang on IRC he felt that we should maintain the
>>> highlevel picking a board implies ARCH and other settings.
On Apr 20, 2009, at 5:01 PM, Jon Smirl wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 5:11 PM, Kumar Gala
> wrote:
>> In chatting w/Wolfgang on IRC he felt that we should maintain the
>> highlevel picking a board implies ARCH and other settings.
>>
>> However this seems like a lot of boards in one list.. To
On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 5:11 PM, Kumar Gala wrote:
> In chatting w/Wolfgang on IRC he felt that we should maintain the
> highlevel picking a board implies ARCH and other settings.
>
> However this seems like a lot of boards in one list.. To get a rough
> order of magnitude MAKEALL is ~880 lines.
In chatting w/Wolfgang on IRC he felt that we should maintain the
highlevel picking a board implies ARCH and other settings.
However this seems like a lot of boards in one list.. To get a rough
order of magnitude MAKEALL is ~880 lines. How can we reduce this to
make it a bit more manageable
29 matches
Mail list logo
