Branching 4.9

Ralf Corsepius ralf.corsepius at
Thu Jul 3 13:32:06 UTC 2008

On Thu, 2008-07-03 at 08:01 -0500, Joel Sherrill wrote:
> Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> > On Tue, 2008-07-01 at 13:24 -0500, Joel Sherrill wrote:
> >
> >   
> >> There are a couple of tool issues on the table
> >> so I expect there will be some tool revisions
> >> along the way but yum makes that easy to deal
> >> with.
> >>     
> >
> > Like any RTEMS branch, branching will have to be accompanied by a
> > version bump (4.9->4.10) on CVS-HEAD, which should be accompanied by a
> > tool version bump.
> >   
> Yes.  And just to be clear I meant that I expected at least one
> if not two updates to the 4.9 tools. 
Not unlikely, but the 4.9 tools actually are independent from the
branching the RTEMS source-tree.

To me, the critical point in branching is having rtems-4.10 toolchains
ready soon enough.

In an ideal world, they would be in place when the RTEMS source-tree is
being branched. In real world, this will take a finite amount of time
and which will cause a couple of temporary "hick-ups".

>  For updated SUSE support
As you know, SuSE-11.0 is a problem. 
SuSE's has changed it's rpm data format in a way such that
RH/Fedora-based distros can't read them anymore, and RH has made clear
they are not interested in adding support for SuSE's rpm changes in
released versions of Fedora nor RHEL. It's even unclear if future
RH/Fedora's rpm will be able to read SuSE rpms, because SuSE's work is
based on unreleased alpha versions of external libraries which so far do
not exist in Fedora/RH.

That said, ATM, it seems very unlikely, we will be able to provide
SuSE-11.0 based rpms any time soon. For now, I resort to feeding RTEMS's
SuSE-11.0 repos with SuSE-10.3 rpms.

> and whatever becomes of the m68k/coldfire  multilib discussion.
Yes, but that's one amongst several discussions affecting the
RTEMS-4.9's toolchain, independently from branching.


More information about the users mailing list