[PATCH rtems-libbsd 0/5] RTEMS LibBSD Documentation

[Peter Dufault]

> On Aug 4, 2021, at 18:42 , Chris Johns <chrisj at rtems.org> wrote:
> 
> On 5/8/21 2:22 am, Christian Mauderer wrote:
>> On 04/08/2021 18:09, Gedare Bloom wrote:
>>> On Wed, Aug 4, 2021 at 9:05 AM Christian MAUDERER
>>> <christian.mauderer at embedded-brains.de> wrote:
>>>> Am 04.08.21 um 16:55 schrieb Gedare Bloom:
>>>>> On Wed, Aug 4, 2021 at 4:18 AM Christian MAUDERER
>>>>> <christian.mauderer at embedded-brains.de> wrote:
>>>>> My preference would be to leave the legacy doc where it is,
>>>> 
>>>> Just a comment for that point: I know that the doc has been moved around
>>>> a bit. But I think we should try to get all similar options onto the
>>>> same "level". Otherwise if a user searches for "How to do networking
>>>> with RTEMS" and he finds https://docs.rtems.org/ the only manual with
>>>> "Networking" is the legacy stack. If it is on the same page (level,
>>>> hirarchie, ...) like the headline "libbsd Networking and other cool
>>>> stuff" or "lwIP", a user instantly can see that there is more than one
>>>> option.
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> That's a good point, but I want to keep the legacy stack separate from
>>> the rest of the documentation to make it simpler to deprecate/obsolete
>>> it. I don't see value in moving it, just to kill it in the next
>>> release. AFAIK, we will strongly discourage anyone from using it in
>>> rtems-6, and I'd like to kill it off moving forward once we feel
>>> confident that lwIP is feasible for us to maintain. Your point about
>>> marketing is well-taken though.
>> 
>> OK. I didn't expect that we are that far that we already plan to (maybe) remove
>> it in the next release. In that case I agree: It's not worth the effort to move it.
>> 
> 
> Should something be added to the legacy manual indicating it's status?
> 

Is this realistic?  I looked at the list of board support packages output by "./rtems-bsps" in RTEMS-6 and there are many old ones (M68K, old VME boards) that I assume use the legacy stack and aren't likely to be updated to use LWIP or "libbsd" and where the old stack works and has a small memory foot print.

I understand not adding new drivers to legacy but deprecating the stack requires deprecation and freezing at a given release of those BSPs.  That's OK with me, the use of these must be primarily maintenance.  I think all these points need to be explained.

Peter
-----------------
Peter Dufault
HD Associates, Inc.      Software and System Engineering



-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 235 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP
URL: <http://lists.rtems.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20210805/ca0251f8/attachment.bin>