From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mail-yh0-x22a.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4002:c01::22a]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.80.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1X9W4r-0003V0-Lq for barebox@lists.infradead.org; Tue, 22 Jul 2014 09:09:42 +0000 Received: by mail-yh0-f42.google.com with SMTP id a41so4927134yho.1 for ; Tue, 22 Jul 2014 02:09:19 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <1406015842-20754-4-git-send-email-holgerschurig@gmail.de> <1406017939.4667.14.camel@weser.hi.pengutronix.de> <1406019042.4667.23.camel@weser.hi.pengutronix.de> Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2014 11:09:19 +0200 Message-ID: From: Holger Schurig List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "barebox" Errors-To: barebox-bounces+u.kleine-koenig=pengutronix.de@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] sandbox: work around missing of_add_memory_bank() To: Holger Schurig Cc: "barebox@lists.infradead.org" Okay, another post, with less heat. I asked you specifically if a proposed solution would be ok. You didn't answer at all. That proposed solution would still not "work" (it won't add a memory bank, because AFAIK in sandbox there are no memory banks at all, it just uses the hosts memory). It might compile, however and it might be a bit of unneeded code in the "make ARCH=sandbox sandbox_defconfig && make all" case. The tone of your mail made me think that I actually cannot convince you, that you don't want this. Your reference to signal-to-noise made me think this. I got the impression that you're dismissing the concept of static checking and of code-massaging to make that easier. I don't need to contribute to barebox. My barebox is running for my board, I can stop now. I don't need to barebox to promote myself, e.g. as a freelancer. Yet I also don't want to contribute crap to barebox. So if my attempts are not going any further, and specific question if XYZ would be ok and instead I get junk about signal-to-noise back, then I simply aren't inclined to promote things further. Feel yourself now utterly unconvinced :-) _______________________________________________ barebox mailing list barebox@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox