From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from 15.mo5.mail-out.ovh.net ([178.33.107.29] helo=mo5.mail-out.ovh.net) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.76 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1TTyww-000217-Mp for barebox@lists.infradead.org; Thu, 01 Nov 2012 17:53:03 +0000 Received: from mail178.ha.ovh.net (b7.ovh.net [213.186.33.57]) by mo5.mail-out.ovh.net (Postfix) with SMTP id 3F148FFABCA for ; Thu, 1 Nov 2012 19:00:11 +0100 (CET) Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2012 18:50:49 +0100 From: Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD Message-ID: <20121101175049.GK29599@game.jcrosoft.org> References: <1351791438-29967-1-git-send-email-robert.jarzmik@free.fr> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1351791438-29967-1-git-send-email-robert.jarzmik@free.fr> 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-bounces@lists.infradead.org Errors-To: barebox-bounces+u.kleine-koenig=pengutronix.de@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Y-Modem implementation change To: Robert Jarzmik Cc: barebox@lists.infradead.org On 18:37 Thu 01 Nov , Robert Jarzmik wrote: > Hi everyone, > > This patchset aims at changing the Y-Modem protocol implementation. > You have already seen the RFC version, this is the next version, which : > - provides a much more tested version > - is ready for review > > The following comments have been taken into account : > - Antony: testing on a serial line > - Sascha: split between protocol and commands > - Jean-Christophe: kermit protocol change > > So before doing the real review, could I ask of you : > - Antony: could you redo your test over a serial line by applying only > the first patch so that you can compare loady and loady2 ? > Don't use "loady2 -g", as Y-Modem/G protocol requires a > lossless line (USB), and a serial line cannot guarantee it. > - Sascha: does the split command/protocol suit you ? > - Jean-Christophe: I left the loadb implementation as it is. The goal > of the patch is to change X-Modem and Y-Modem(G) > implementation, not kermit. Could you test that I > have not created a regression of loadb ? I'll prefer to have a new command named xyz so we have no confusion between loadb and the new one Best Regards, J. _______________________________________________ barebox mailing list barebox@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox