On 18.01.2008 16:33, svn@coreboot.org wrote:
Author: stepan Date: 2008-01-18 16:33:49 +0100 (Fri, 18 Jan 2008) New Revision: 3055
Modified: trunk/util/lxbios/ChangeLog trunk/util/lxbios/DISCLAIMER trunk/util/lxbios/README [...] Log: rename linuxbios -> coreboot Signed-off-by: Stefan Reinauer stepan@coresystems.de Acked-by: Stefan Reinauer stepan@coresystems.de [...] Modified: trunk/util/lxbios/reg_expr.h =================================================================== --- trunk/util/lxbios/reg_expr.h 2008-01-18 15:33:10 UTC (rev 3054) +++ trunk/util/lxbios/reg_expr.h 2008-01-18 15:33:49 UTC (rev 3055) @@ -8,8 +8,8 @@
- UCRL-CODE-2003-012
- All rights reserved.
- This file is part of lxbios, a utility for reading/writing LinuxBIOS
- parameters and displaying information from the LinuxBIOS table.
- This file is part of lxbios, a utility for reading/writing coreboot
- parameters and displaying information from the coreboot table.
- For details, see http://www.llnl.gov/linux/lxbios/.
- Please also read the file DISCLAIMER which is included in this software
The URL mentioned above (and in lots of other files in lxbios) gives me a 404 not found.
And while we're doing an unconditional "s/linuxbios/coreboot/" everywhere, it may be good to explain why some things are named "lxbios" when we purge all mentioning of LinuxBIOS. (Some places where LinuxBIOS is mentioned should probably be left unchanged to preserve historic correctness.)
Regards, Carl-Daniel
* Carl-Daniel Hailfinger c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006@gmx.net [080118 16:50]:
- For details, see http://www.llnl.gov/linux/lxbios/.
The URL mentioned above (and in lots of other files in lxbios) gives me a 404 not found.
There's http://www.coreboot.org/Lxbios.
And while we're doing an unconditional "s/linuxbios/coreboot/" everywhere, it may be good to explain why some things are named "lxbios" when we purge all mentioning of LinuxBIOS.
The utility will be renamed, too. There are lots of linuxbios references everywhere, so for safety, not everything will be done at once. Svn doesn't like renaming directories with changes.
The rename was not at all unconditional, all occurences were checked.
(Some places where LinuxBIOS is mentioned should probably be left unchanged to preserve historic correctness.)
In addition to that, I left some occurences of the name in LANL license headers.
On Jan 18, 2008 8:13 AM, Stefan Reinauer stepan@coresystems.de wrote:
In addition to that, I left some occurences of the name in LANL license headers.
I recommend not touching those LANL headers.
thanks
ron
On Fri, Jan 18, 2008 at 05:13:00PM +0100, Stefan Reinauer wrote:
- Carl-Daniel Hailfinger c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006@gmx.net [080118 16:50]:
- For details, see http://www.llnl.gov/linux/lxbios/.
The URL mentioned above (and in lots of other files in lxbios) gives me a 404 not found.
There's http://www.coreboot.org/Lxbios.
Yeah. As we're the "upstream" developers now, we should use that URL everywhere.
And while we're doing an unconditional "s/linuxbios/coreboot/" everywhere, it may be good to explain why some things are named "lxbios" when we purge all mentioning of LinuxBIOS.
The utility will be renamed, too.
Suggestions for the new name?
We might even keep the name, it doesn't contain "linuxbios" in it, just "lx", which could mean different things, e.g. "Lightweight, eXtensible". The "bios" part is not necessarily a problem, as lxbios can indeed dump CMOS bytes (which are used by proprietary BIOSes)...
There are lots of linuxbios references everywhere, so for safety, not everything will be done at once.
Yes, I wouldn't do all in one step.
Svn doesn't like renaming directories with changes.
Yep, please do renames in an extra step; one commit which does _only_ a rename (svn mv), so it's better readable in 'svn log' or in trac. No changes should be done in commits which contain 'svn mv's.
Uwe.
On Jan 18, 2008 9:20 AM, Uwe Hermann uwe@hermann-uwe.de wrote:
Suggestions for the new name?
something that maybe is easier to say?
fixcmos?
:-)
ron
Peter Stuge wrote:
On Fri, Jan 18, 2008 at 06:20:11PM +0100, Uwe Hermann wrote:
The utility will be renamed, too.
Suggestions for the new name?
nvramtool or maybe just nvram
I like this one. Though I think the powerpc folks have a "nvram" tool, too.
On Fri, Jan 18, 2008 at 07:51:00PM +0100, Stefan Reinauer wrote:
Peter Stuge wrote:
On Fri, Jan 18, 2008 at 06:20:11PM +0100, Uwe Hermann wrote:
The utility will be renamed, too.
Suggestions for the new name?
nvramtool or maybe just nvram
I like this one. Though I think the powerpc folks have a "nvram" tool, too.
Let's avoid trouble here, nvram is too generic anyway (IMO).
I like nvramtool (if we rename it at all -- lxbios is fine too)
Uwe.
On 18.01.2008 20:02, Uwe Hermann wrote:
On Fri, Jan 18, 2008 at 07:51:00PM +0100, Stefan Reinauer wrote:
Peter Stuge wrote:
On Fri, Jan 18, 2008 at 06:20:11PM +0100, Uwe Hermann wrote:
The utility will be renamed, too.
Suggestions for the new name?
nvramtool or maybe just nvram
I like this one. Though I think the powerpc folks have a "nvram" tool, too.
Let's avoid trouble here, nvram is too generic anyway (IMO).
I like nvramtool (if we rename it at all -- lxbios is fine too)
I like nvramtool or cmostool. Both suggest usefulness besided coreboot.
Regards, Carl-Daniel
Carl-Daniel Hailfinger wrote:
On 18.01.2008 20:02, Uwe Hermann wrote:
On Fri, Jan 18, 2008 at 07:51:00PM +0100, Stefan Reinauer wrote:
Peter Stuge wrote:
On Fri, Jan 18, 2008 at 06:20:11PM +0100, Uwe Hermann wrote:
The utility will be renamed, too.
Suggestions for the new name?
nvramtool or maybe just nvram
I like this one. Though I think the powerpc folks have a "nvram" tool, too.
Let's avoid trouble here, nvram is too generic anyway (IMO).
I like nvramtool (if we rename it at all -- lxbios is fine too)
I like nvramtool or cmostool. Both suggest usefulness besided coreboot.
Regards, Carl-Daniel
nvramtool. cmostool has already been used too many times.
-Corey
Corey Osgood wrote:
nvramtool. cmostool has already been used too many times.
plus, it really has nothing to do with handling mosfets.
Stefan