Has anyone tried to port Mono to RTEMS

xuelin.tian xuelin.tian at qkmtech.com
Wed May 24 14:43:18 UTC 2017

Thanks a lot. 
And I have one last concern, what platform did you use then? Is there so much work on assembly part (or native language)? 

------------------ Original ------------------
From:  "Joel Sherrill"<joel at rtems.org>;
Date:  Wed, May 24, 2017 09:21 PM
To:  "xuelin.tian at qkmtech.com"<xuelin.tian at qkmtech.com>; 
Cc:  "users at rtems.org"<users at rtems.org>; 
Subject:  Re: Re: Has anyone tried to port Mono to RTEMS


On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 7:41 AM, xuelin.tian at qkmtech.com <xuelin.tian at qkmtech.com> wrote:
 Thank you for your reply.

Regardless of testing, are there any difficulties to port Mono to RTEMS?

I don't recall any particularly. Mostly it just was a bunch of functions for the interpreter
that mapped to C Library and POSIX calls directly. You will have to figure out the
"main()" that invokes the interpreter on an assembly (was that the right word)?

My technique for porting estimates is to try to do it. Mostly fix minor things or
#if 0 them if they require some time-consuming work. I don't recall doing much
of that. The build system at the time was straightforward.


 Best wishes,
xuelin.tian at qkmtech.com

From: Joel Sherrill
Date: 2017-05-24 20:19
To: xuelin.tian
CC: rtems-users at rtems.org
Subject: Re: Has anyone tried to port Mono to RTEMS

On May 23, 2017 8:58 PM, "xuelin.tian at qkmtech.com" <xuelin.tian at qkmtech.com> wrote:
 Dear all,
Is that possible to port Mono to RTEMS? Has anyone tried this before? 
As I notice that there is an open project in RTEMS projects. 

Sometime ago, I was asked to provide an estimate for this. It had to be between five and ten years ago because we were at the old office but after we had done a few years of GSoC. I did enough work preparing the estimate where I had the code building without too much effort. I saw the challenge as getting the test suite running since you would have to create a test harness and build/assembly helper that packaged the interpreted code with the interpreter in order to run it. At that time, I envisioned having to create a base image and a filesystem image per test.

Our POSIX was good enough then to avoid much trouble. It should only be easier now since the POSIX support has improved.

There were a lot of Mono tests and I expected most to pass quickly. But there was no way to know how many issues would be encountered and how many root causes there would be. I expected to fix one or two things and then run all the tests. That was where I expected time to be consumed.

FWIW I recall the GSoC date part because they thought we could magically get students to do testing for free on a schedule. :)

I hope that helps. It is feasible but the key is testing.



 Best wishes,
xuelin.tian at qkmtech.com


 users mailing list
 users at rtems.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.rtems.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20170524/de834382/attachment-0002.html>

More information about the users mailing list