<div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr">Some odd questions that are mostly about making this a self-contained entity with no loose ends.</div><div dir="ltr"><br><div>+ Can the network demos be merged also?<br></div><div><br></div><div>+ rtems-docs has the Network Users Guide which is legacy only. As a minimum, it needs to be renamed to have Legacy in the title. Better would be to convert it to markdown/asciidoc and just toss it in the legacy repo.</div><div><br></div><div>+ Gaisler needs a poke about the grlib NIC drivers. And Daniel expects it. File a ticket that it is time for them to support libbsd and assign it to him. :)</div><div><br></div><div>I'm ok with Chris' proposal to give noticeĀ Grep'ing for NETWORK_DRIVER_NAME did turn up more files than I expected. Perhaps that is simply a list of driver names and attach functions for a readme in the repo. That's all that should have been in the bsp.h files.</div><div><br></div><div>This is awesome work and much appreciated.</div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Fri, Feb 26, 2021 at 12:12 AM Gedare Bloom <<a href="mailto:gedare@rtems.org">gedare@rtems.org</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">On Thu, Feb 25, 2021 at 6:06 PM Chris Johns <<a href="mailto:chrisj@rtems.org" target="_blank">chrisj@rtems.org</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
> On 26/2/21 4:49 am, Vijay Kumar Banerjee wrote:<br>
> > The stand-alone repository is very close to completion now and I could<br>
> > use the networking01 test with the standalone repo and it successfully<br>
> > runs on pc-qemu.<br>
><br>
> Fantastic news.<br>
><br>
> > The following are the links to the branches with the<br>
> > final version of the commits and I would really appreciate a review<br>
> > and suggestions on what else needs to be done (I'm not sending patches<br>
> > as they're big and would hit the devel limit):<br>
><br>
> I am fine reviewing the changes in the repos.<br>
><br>
> > RTEMS: <a href="https://git.rtems.org/vijay/rtems.git/log/?h=devel-no-libnet" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://git.rtems.org/vijay/rtems.git/log/?h=devel-no-libnet</a><br>
><br>
> Looks good. The only observation is a bisect will probability break as the<br>
> nfsclient depends on rpc but I am OK with now things are.<br>
><br>
> I checked rtems_waf and I think it is OK dealing with no networking defined in<br>
> the RTEMS opts header.<br>
><br>
> > rtems-net-legacy: <a href="https://git.rtems.org/vijay/rtems-net-legacy.git/log/?h=main" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://git.rtems.org/vijay/rtems-net-legacy.git/log/?h=main</a><br>
><br>
> Would calling lnetwork.py netlegacy.py be a better match for that name? Closer<br>
> to the repo naming.<br>
><br>
> Do the new python files need to pep8 formatted? :)<br>
> [ <a href="https://gitlab.com/ita1024/waf/-/tree/master/playground/pep8" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://gitlab.com/ita1024/waf/-/tree/master/playground/pep8</a> ]<br>
><br>
> In bsp_drivers.py is there a waf node way to find the sources rather than a<br>
> python os walk?<br>
> [ <a href="https://waf.io/apidocs/Node.html#waflib.Node.Node.ant_glob" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://waf.io/apidocs/Node.html#waflib.Node.Node.ant_glob</a> ]<br>
><br>
> Should the README reference rtems_waf and all the configure options it supports?<br>
><br>
> Do we need a LICENSE file?<br>
><br>
> ><br>
> > There are at least two things that need to be done:<br>
> > 1. Shift the tests like mghttpd01 that use the libnetworking stack, to<br>
> > the standalone repo like networking01<br>
><br>
> OK<br>
><br>
> > 2. There are still codes that use the #ifdef RTEMS_NETWORKING. What do<br>
> > we want to do about those?<br>
><br>
> How many BSPs/places/areas are we talking about?<br>
><br>
> Would it be practical to add a cgit link to a ticket and then post an email to<br>
> user and devel stating those interested in BSPs x,y,z to review the ticket? We<br>
> then wait a week and after that the remaining defines are removed.<br>
><br>
> Do we have a ticket for this task?<br>
><br>
<a href="https://devel.rtems.org/ticket/3850" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://devel.rtems.org/ticket/3850</a><br>
<br>
I'll let Vijay answer the rest.<br>
<br>
> > Apart from these two points above, do the commits and the standalone<br>
> > repo look OK (close to mergeable)?<br>
><br>
> For me this is very close and a welcomed change for RTEMS 6. Really nice work.<br>
><br>
> Thanks<br>
> Chris<br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> devel mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:devel@rtems.org" target="_blank">devel@rtems.org</a><br>
> <a href="http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel</a><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
devel mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:devel@rtems.org" target="_blank">devel@rtems.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel</a><br>
</blockquote></div></div>