Hi Simon,
On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 8:04 AM, Simon Glass wrote:
> Hi Graeme,
>
> On Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 7:23 PM, Graeme Russ wrote:
>> Hi Simon,
>>
>> On 27/08/11 10:25, Simon Glass wrote:
>>> Hi Mike,
>>>
>>> On Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 1:55 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Thursday, August 25, 20
Hi Graeme,
On Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 7:23 PM, Graeme Russ wrote:
> Hi Simon,
>
> On 27/08/11 10:25, Simon Glass wrote:
>> Hi Mike,
>>
>> On Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 1:55 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>>> On Thursday, August 25, 2011 23:32:38 Simon Glass wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
- I mean that the tftp comm
Hi Simon,
On 27/08/11 10:25, Simon Glass wrote:
> Hi Mike,
>
> On Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 1:55 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>> On Thursday, August 25, 2011 23:32:38 Simon Glass wrote:
[snip]
>>> - I mean that the tftp command will 'obtain' a file when it asks for
>>> one, although the actual Etherne
Hi Mike,
On Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 1:59 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Friday, August 26, 2011 00:36:15 Graeme Russ wrote:
>> On Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 1:32 PM, Simon Glass wrote:
>> > 4. When I create a driver, like the serial test driver, should that be
>> > serial_test.c, test_serial.c, sandbox_se
Hi Mike,
On Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 1:55 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Thursday, August 25, 2011 23:32:38 Simon Glass wrote:
>> 1. What should I call the architecture? I have so far called it 'native'.
>> 2. What should I call the vendor (board/xxx)? 'test' or 'sandbox'?
>> 3. What should I call th
On Friday, August 26, 2011 00:36:15 Graeme Russ wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 1:32 PM, Simon Glass wrote:
> > 4. When I create a driver, like the serial test driver, should that be
> > serial_test.c, test_serial.c, sandbox_serial or something else?
>
> I guess you'll have /drivers/serial/sandbo
On Thursday, August 25, 2011 23:32:38 Simon Glass wrote:
> 1. What should I call the architecture? I have so far called it 'native'.
> 2. What should I call the vendor (board/xxx)? 'test' or 'sandbox'?
> 3. What should I call the board? Is that 'sandbox'?
as Graeme said, just call them all "sandbo
Hi Simon,
On Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 1:32 PM, Simon Glass wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Thanks all for comments. It sounds like people are keen on the idea so
> far as it goes. I will work on a patch set complete enough to bring up
> a U-Boot prompt, allowing typing of 'help' and with a special segfault
> featur
Hi,
Thanks all for comments. It sounds like people are keen on the idea so
far as it goes. I will work on a patch set complete enough to bring up
a U-Boot prompt, allowing typing of 'help' and with a special segfault
feature for anything else.
Before I do this, and to avoid me redoing work later:
Hi Simon, Mike
On Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 1:01 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Thursday, August 25, 2011 08:58:00 Simon Glass wrote:
>> Proposal
>>
>
> for people who might be familiar with the barebox boot loader, Simon is
> basically proposing the same thing as barebox's "sandbox" target.
On Thursday, August 25, 2011 04:56:39 PM Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Thursday, August 25, 2011 09:56:02 Andreas Bießmann wrote:
> > Am 25.08.2011 14:58, schrieb Simon Glass:
> > > Summary: I am quite keen on improving the test infrastructure in
> > > U-Boot. I would like to have a test suite that ca
On Thursday, August 25, 2011 16:21:51 Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Simon Glass wrote:
> > For speed, debugging and convenience, it would be nice to run U-Boot
> > under a generic Linux environment on a workstation, and test all the
> > generic non-platform code. The basic problem with this is that the
>
Dear Simon Glass,
In message
you wrote:
>
> Summary: I am quite keen on improving the test infrastructure in
> U-Boot. I would like to have a test suite that can run in a minute or
> two on a Linux PC and test all non-platform code.
I highly appreaciate such efforts!
> For speed, debugging an
On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 8:01 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Thursday, August 25, 2011 08:58:00 Simon Glass wrote:
>> Proposal
>>
>
> for people who might be familiar with the barebox boot loader, Simon is
> basically proposing the same thing as barebox's "sandbox" target.
>
> to avoid con
On Thursday, August 25, 2011 08:58:00 Simon Glass wrote:
> Proposal
>
for people who might be familiar with the barebox boot loader, Simon is
basically proposing the same thing as barebox's "sandbox" target.
to avoid confusion/fragmentation in this area, and since the name is a large
p
On Thursday, August 25, 2011 09:56:02 Andreas Bießmann wrote:
> Am 25.08.2011 14:58, schrieb Simon Glass:
> > Summary: I am quite keen on improving the test infrastructure in
> > U-Boot. I would like to have a test suite that can run in a minute or
> > two on a Linux PC and test all non-platform co
On Thursday, August 25, 2011 02:58:00 PM Simon Glass wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Summary: I am quite keen on improving the test infrastructure in
> U-Boot. I would like to have a test suite that can run in a minute or
> two on a Linux PC and test all non-platform code.
>
> Detail
> ==
> We can break the
Dear Simon,
Am 25.08.2011 14:58, schrieb Simon Glass:
> Hi,
>
> Summary: I am quite keen on improving the test infrastructure in
> U-Boot. I would like to have a test suite that can run in a minute or
> two on a Linux PC and test all non-platform code.
> To get around this I propose that we cr
18 matches
Mail list logo
