Dear Tom Rini, > On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 07:09:35PM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote: > > Dear Tom Rini, > > > > > On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 06:53:19PM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote: > > > > Dear Joe Hershberger, > > > > > > > > [...] > > > > > > > > > While you're touching all these files, why not replace the > > > > > __u_boot_cmd* implementation with this as well. There's no need to > > > > > leave a special case in there as well is there? > > > > > > > > Not in the first stab, it can be indeed done later, but now I'd like > > > > to avoid breakage. Besides, replacing u_boot_cmd would break > > > > bisectability, I want to preserve it and rather apply more patches > > > > slowly than less patches recklessly. > > > > > > Agreed. We need to work hard to make sure we do lots of incremental > > > steps here to make sure breakage can be bisected. > > > > +1 (actually +inf.) > > > > > Making use of the > > > 'exec' step in git rebase is very helpful for making sure this is the > > > case too, btw. > > > > exec step ? > > Yes, in 'git rebase -i' you can insert exec lines after each commit such > as: > pick 12345 Commit 1 > exec script-that-runs-MAKEALL.sh > pick 6789a Commit 2 > exec script-that-runs-MAKEALL.sh > > I use my MAKEALL wrapper (http://pastebin.com/fNhG4iCd but I've updated > a bit more since I uploaded that) and --log `git rev-parse --short HEAD` > so I can see what's gone on for every step in a series.
I guess you have one hell of a badass computer cluster then ;-) Best regards, Marek Vasut _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
