On 18:00 Mon 29 Oct , Johannes Stezenbach wrote: > On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 05:05:13PM +0100, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote: > > On 10:56 Mon 29 Oct , Johannes Stezenbach wrote: > > > > > > I wonder how this will work in practice. If I use a simple > > > /env/bin/init script and someone makes changes to a command > > > which isn't used by my /env/bin/init, will it still cause > > > my environment to be detected as incompatible? > > > > > > Maybe it would be a good idea to give the user control > > > over when to change COMMAND_ABI_VERSION by putting it into menuconfig? > > > > > > Either way I guess it means the default environment's init script > > > would need to implement automatic update to not lose important settings. > > here you loose nothing we just load defaulenv then you load the old one if you > > one the code does not save the defaultenv automatlically > > Well, the whole point of having an environment is that the > user can save a customized version. So by definition > falling back to the default means you are going to annoy seme users > (even though it's usually not difficult to restore the customizations). here the issue iin the env we have 2 part the default and the config so we should speperate them so we can update the rootfs and keep the config ABI Best Regards, J. _______________________________________________ barebox mailing list barebox@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox
