Re: [PATCH 3/3] sandbox: work around missing of_add_memory_bank()

[Holger Schurig <holgerschurig@gmail.com>]

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