Detlev Zundel wrote: > This "but there are other examples doing just the same!" arguing is > getting tiresome. Please accept that this is not an argument capable of > convincing people - the opposite is true.
It's also very frustrating when developers look at the way U-Boot does things, then spend countless hours or days implementing something similar, only be told, "Well, we know this is how it's done, but it's wrong, so you need to rewrite your code." Frankly, I think *that* is way more tiresome. > Is there a technical reason why the initialization has to be in U-Boot? I'll have to re-examine the code. There may be a way to eliminate any such initialization. -- Timur Tabi Linux kernel developer at Freescale _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
