On Sun, 7 Apr 2013 02:02:43 +0400 Maksim Kuleshov mmcx@mail.ru wrote:
I don't understand why change "xilinx" on "dlc-5". Changes command line , but does not change the behavior of the program. Users have worked well the current version, now there will be problems. Call flashrom can be integrated into the various programmes, and change the startup options can be very difficult. In the documents of the Xilinx name of the "dlc-5" is very rare. More often adapter is called "Parallel Cable III".It is probably better not to change the name of "xilinx".
Thanks for your considerations regarding the name, that's a valid point. Using some consistent scheme to differentiate the various types is favorable, therefore using the model name instead of the company name generally speaking makes sense. Also, I consider breaking applications that use the CLI instead of libflashrom a good thing. We should do that more often so that either they get so annoyed that their authors review the libflashrom patches or annoy us back enough so that we eventually integrate libflashrom. This was somewhat sarcastic, but my main point is: the CLI should not be used by other programs. Regarding users... that's an excellent point because I am not sure how well the help texts (manpage and --L output) are after this change. Carl-Daniel?
Thanks. I'll wait for Maksim's signoff confirmation before committing.
I tested only the ByteblasterMV and Wiggler, but their support is not included in this patch.
Signing off is about the code, not about testing or reviewing. It indicates that you were authorized to contribute that code under the given license to this project. And in this case Carl-Daniel implies with it general consent to what he has done with your code when refining the patches. I interpret your considerations regarding the type parameter as disagreement, but I might be wrong...