Re: [flashrom] [PATCH] fix output for multiple found flash chips

[Stefan Tauner]

On Mon, 25 Jul 2011 01:31:06 +0200
Carl-Daniel Hailfinger  wrote:
> Am 25.07.2011 00:32 schrieb Stefan Tauner:
> > On Fri, 24 Jun 2011 19:03:52 +0200 Stefan Tauner wrote:
> > > missing quotes
> > > missing commas
> > > Signed-off-by: Stefan Tauner
> > >
> > > cli_classic.c |    7 ++++---
> > >  1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/cli_classic.c b/cli_classic.c
> > > index 59096a0..aba6edf 100644
> > > --- a/cli_classic.c
> > > +++ b/cli_classic.c
> > > @@ -373,9 +373,10 @@ int cli_classic(int argc, char *argv[])
> > >    }
> > >
> > > if (chipcount > 1) {
> > > printf("Multiple flash chips were detected:");
> > > for (i = 0; i < chipcount; i++)
> > > 	printf(" %s", flashes[i].name);
> > > printf("Multiple flash chips were detected: \"%s\"",
> > > 	flashes[0].name);
> > > for (i = 1; i < chipcount; i++)
> > > 	printf(", \"%s\"", flashes[i].name);
> > > printf("\nPlease specify which chip to use with the -c <chipname> option.\n");
> > > programmer_shutdown();
> > > exit(1);
> >
> > since no one else has reviewed this yet and it is fairly trivial, i will
> > add it with my next "tested stuff" commit
>
> I'm not sure if this is a good idea. People might think that the chip
> name contains quotes. Then again, with chip names containing commas and
> other funny characters, it might even help.

i think our output when we find a chip is much more misleading:
> Found chip "Winbond W25X64"

if one tries to use -c "Winbond W25X64" then it will fail, the code
above has no such problem. i am certain some termination between
multiple chips is needed, even if there are none with spaces in their
names. this increases readability of the message a lot imho:
Multiple flash chips were detected: ABC/DEF XYZ
vs.
Multiple flash chips were detected: "ABC/DEF", "XYZ"