Am Sonntag, den 25.05.2014, 13:58 +0400 schrieb Antony Pavlov: > Hi all! > > I have adapted barebox for work with picotcp network stack. > > Picotcp is not a small piece of code so I can't easyly send > a patch to the barebox maillist. I have put results of my work on github, > see mini-howto below. > > This picotcp integration is a dirty hack in many ways. > We need additional effors for adapting barebox and picotcp > for more easy joint operation. > > Please express your opinion on my work. I'm awaiting your comments. > You forgot to mention one important thing: Why is this change beneficial to barebox? Please don't get me wrong this is in no way a criticism on your work. I only skimmed through the branch as of now and can't really comment on the change. So please help me out: do you feel the code is leaner/cleaner than the existing barebox network support? Or what's your motivation for this? Regards, Lucas -- Pengutronix e.K. | Lucas Stach | Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | _______________________________________________ barebox mailing list barebox@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox
