RTEMS, Bootloaders and HW parameters

[dufault at hda.com (Peter Dufault)]

On Nov 9, 2009, at 4:02 , Thomas D?rfler wrote:

> I am always a bit suspect if one particular implementation is used  
> as a
> general API.

I'm only sometimes a bit suspect when one particular implementation is  
used as a general API.

I hate it when an API is modified only by doing something like  
prepending "rtems_" to the front of it (or by replacing "umon_" with  
"rtems_").  If, for example, the uMON API is perfectly adequate for  
what is needed now and in the foreseeable future and if it is used on  
the majority of the boards using such a facility then go ahead and  
standardize on it.

I'm not saying this is the case, you have to use your good judgement,  
but I've seen too many examples of mulltiplying APIs for no good  
reason not to point this out.

Peter