RTEMS 4.6.2 BSP support
Joel Sherrill <joel@OARcorp.com>
joel.sherrill at OARcorp.com
Fri Oct 22 15:51:55 UTC 2004
Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> On Fri, 2004-10-22 at 14:08, Joel Sherrill wrote:
>>Thomas Doerfler wrote:
>>>apart from the comments of Joel and Ralf: Surely it
>>>is possible to extract the new BSPs from CVS and
>>>integrate them locally into the RTEMS 4.6.2 source
>>>tree, but this might require a lot of tinkering...
>>At this point, there have been mostly changes to:
>> + reduce Makefiles from ~1400 -> ~400
>> + eliminate trailing spaces in files
>> + move c/src/tests to testsuites
>> + transition to ISO C 99 types like int32_t
> + Source code dependency tracking.
> + Standardization of Makefiles.
> + header installation directory cleanup.
>>So the Makefile's have to be completely different
>>is the current biggest issue.
This statement sounds negative and I meant it to be neutral.
The Makefile/auto* changes are positive moves in the CVS source.
They do simplify things enormously and are a critical step in
getting separate CPU and BSP Kits.
This was intended as a practical statement .. you have a
BSP from CVS and want to use it with 4.6. The Makefile's are
> A matter of perspective - IMO, this step is amongst the most important
I agree completely.
> The #1 advance to me is the header installation directory cleanup - This
> is the step which makes shipping binaries possible).
> The #2 advance is dependency tracking, which now only is possible
> because of having fundamentally redesigned the Makefiles and having
> dumped the old Makefiles.
I have been trying to track 4.7 improvements and changes on the
website. If you check out wwwrtems from CVS, see
htdocs/rtems-4.7/index.html. The writing isn't the greatest but I
certainly invite you to explain more about the work you have been doing.
I hope you noticed that your work is at the top of the list.
It should give you some indication of the importance I place onit.
I can't always explain it well but I try. :)
>>So in theory it is possible but it is becoming harder
>>and harder depending upon where you are patching.
> Early submission encouraged - Now is the time to jump on the train ;)
Yes. I am even fighting this. I want to tag the SuperCore before I
attempt to merge the 3.5.1 EDF patch/CD I got while in Munich. :)
Adding Doxygen will break the patch even more.
More information about the users