Hi all, On Mon, Dec 11, 2023 at 6:27 PM Tom Rini <tr...@konsulko.com> wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 11, 2023 at 11:22:45AM -0700, Simon Glass wrote: > > Hi Tom, > [snip] > > > I think in hind-sight too much stuff is omitted without BOOTSTD_FULL. > > > The option itself then enables other stuff too by default, but some > > > parts of the bootflow command itself should be visible even without FULL > > > to make things easier on the user. > > > > At the time the goal was to avoid growth compared to the distro > > scripts. We could perhaps add some more things in with BOOTSTD_FULL > > but still have it as an option? > > Right. But now that we've tried this, some of the feedback has been that > it's just too minimal right now. Like looking at the help message for > bootflow, list and info should probably always be available. And maybe > the flags for "scan" should be re-thought? Too late to change things now > but "bootflow scan -b" should maybe how it's always been for "scan and > boot".
What would be the preferred approach for this patch? Is it to update the default capabilities of bootflow or we can have this patch? Thanks Shantur > > -- > Tom
