RTEMS-CVS is broken

[Ralf Corsepius]

On Thu, 2006-07-13 at 10:24 -0500, Joel Sherrill wrote:
> Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> 
> >Thomas,
> >
> >your last week's monster check in into RTEMS cvs screwed up RTEMS badly:
> >
> >Since your patch, all BSPs, I've tried so far, fail with an error
> >similar to this:
> >..
> >./../../../../armulator/lib/include/rtems/confdefs.h:385: error:
> >'ATA_DRIVER_TASK_DEFAULT_PRIORITY' undeclared here (not in a function)
> >gmake[5]: *** [init.o] Error 1
> >..
> >
> >  
> >
> What configure command are you using? 

In the case above:

<dir>/rtems/configure  --target=arm-rtems4.7 --enable-maintainer-mode
--enable-posix

> >Furthermore, checking what you checked in to confdefs.h, makes me
> >believe you broke cpukit:
> >
> >E.g. this
> >+#ifdef CONFIGURE_APPLICATION_NEEDS_ATA_DRIVER
> >+#include <libchip/ata.h>
> >+#endif
> >
> >accesses libchip/ata.h (not part of cpukit).
> >
> >
> >  
> >
> This may not be so bad since it should only be turned on by code which knows
> the libchip ATA driver is supported on that BSP. 
Sorry I consider the above to be truely unacceptably bad design:

You are turning the hierarchies upside down:
1. libchip drivers are "plugins", a BSP has to "glue them together".
cpukit should not need to know anything about a driver.

2. Conditionally including files outside of cpukit from inside of
cpukit, renders successful building a random accident.

>  It would be more 
> correct long
> term to move the ata.h file to cpukit if it is a "standard RTEMS driver 
> interface" and (hopefully) doesn't suck in a lot more.
The ata stuff is i386 specific.

> >Furthermore, you missed to add changelog entries.
> >
> >  
> >
> That's not good. :(
Yes, it renders reverting these changes a pain.

Ralf