Dear Sean,
In message <d808990b-623d-d962-c7d6-e40063bc5...@gmail.com> you wrote:
>
> > Is your intent to create a fork of this in U-Boot?
>
> Yes. I believe some of the major additions I have made (especially "[RFC
> PATCH 21/28] cli: lil: Add a distinct parsing step") would not be
> accepted by upstream.
Ouch...
> > Could we not update things upstream, at least as an option, to avoid
> > carrying these patches?
>
> For some of the smaller patches, that may be possible. However, I am not
> a fan of the major amount of ifdefs that Hush has. For something as core
> as a shell, I think we should be free to make changes as we see fit
> without worrying about how it will affect a hypothetical backport.
I'm afraind I cannot understand your thinking.
You complain that the existing port of hus has a number of severe
limitations or bugs which have long been fixed upstream, but cannot
be easily fixed in U-Boot because we essentially created an
unmaintained fork - and as a cure, you recommend to do the same
thing again, but this time intentionally and deliberately?
If you had not apparently already invested a lot of effort into this
thing I would assume you must be joking...
To me such an approach is unacceptable.
Best regards,
Wolfgang Denk
--
DENX Software Engineering GmbH, Managing Director: Wolfgang Denk
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: w...@denx.de
If a train station is a place where a train stops,
then what's a workstation?
