Re: uClinux compatibility interest [WAS: Re: Your patches]

[Pavel Machek]

Hi!

Do you think you can separate fixes from your patch? You probably hit some
linux-specific bugs, right?

> It would be nice to reach full uClinux compatibility but my work just isn't so
> far, I just did the partial port for my needs (sorry, I'm not going to do the
> full port just for the needs of the project). Apply of the current state of
> uClinux compatibility has some pros & cons:
> 
> pro) Someone can compile sort-of-Gnokii for uClinux devices out of the box.
> 
> pro) Someone can continue the uClinux porting effort - it is more sexy to 
> start
>      with some already working piece of code.
> 
> con) All the source files get tainted by a megaball of '#ifndef UCLINUX'
>      conditionals everywhere.

That's showstopper.

> con) It isn't just the decision to apply/not apply. Currently the patches are
>      not perfect as sometimes the porting was done directly, without
>      #ifdef-ing. Such apply-decision _will_ require some amount of work to get
>      it working (I can do it but keep it in mind).
> 
> 
> I personally think that it is important to know whether someone is interesting
> in the continuation of uClinux porting. There were some embedded-target posts
> to the list recently although not uClinux-specific ones. Wouldn't be someone
> interested in it? If not I think that such patch apply would just complicate
> your further development without any benefits.

What are main problems with ucLinuxporting? Why can't you just configure it
forcrosscompiation, make? Does it miss select() or something like that?
                                                                        Pavel
PS; with people asking "how to do sms from this weird ucontroller, it might
be usefull for someone....
-- 
Philips Velo 1: 1"x4"x8", 300gram, 60, 12MB, 40bogomips, linux, mutt,
details at http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/velo/index.html.