On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 11:23:23AM +0200, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
> On 09:34 Tue 24 Sep , Sascha Hauer wrote:
> > On Sat, Sep 21, 2013 at 04:54:15PM +0200, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
> > > Signed-off-by: Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <plagnioj@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Signed-off-by: Fargier Sylvain <sylvain.fargier@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > > common/filetype.c | 3 +++
> > > include/filetype.h | 1 +
> > > 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/common/filetype.c b/common/filetype.c
> > > index 59ea25a..ef4452d 100644
> > > --- a/common/filetype.c
> > > +++ b/common/filetype.c
> > > @@ -51,6 +51,7 @@ static const struct filetype_str filetype_str[] = {
> > > [filetype_png] = { "PNG image", "png" },
> > > [filetype_ext] = { "ext filesystem", "ext" },
> > > [filetype_gpt] = { "GUID Partition Table", "gpt" },
> > > + [filetype_bpk] = { "Binary PacKage", "bpk" },
> >
> > Can we have "Somfy Binary PacKage" here? As this file format is rather
> > exoctic I want to make sure we still know what this is in a few years.
> > Was the CamelCase 'PacKage' intended?
> We drop the Somfy to make it more generic and everyone can use it
> as everything is published
In this case it might be useful to have some pointers *why* someone
should use it. To me it looks like a custom cpio format. What's the
advantage of using this instead of cpio or even uImage?
Sascha
--
Pengutronix e.K. | |
Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 |
_______________________________________________
barebox mailing list
barebox@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox
