Re: [lwip-users] 2.0.0 Beta2?

[Sylvain Rochet]

Hi Simon,


On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 10:06:25PM +0200, address@hidden wrote:
> Hey all,
> 
> 2.0.0 Beta1 is nearly 2 months old now and we should move on. 2 months are
> already too long, so the only thing I plan to add for an actual release is:
> - make TCPIP_CORE_LOCKING the default (todo: implement mutexes for the win32
> port)
> - fix the timing issues (patches #7855, #8712, #8995), only I'm no yet sure
> how to fix this best

We should first apply my patch, which doesn't add a new feature but only 
fix the main design issue. If you look at the patch you'll see that it 
is surprisingly straightforward for what it actually does.

I am willing to port the other patchs (#7855, #8712) on top of my change 
once mine is applied and once you acked them for inclusion.


> - work around the often found link-time issue of the fact that the file name
> 'timers.c' is used by FreeRTOS, too (anyone have a good idea?)

timeouts.c, timetriggers.c ?


> I'm open for votes on what else to include into 2.0.0 final, but I'd rather
> throw out 2.0.1 soon instead of delaying 2.0.0 further...

I started working on a PPP rework to allow user custom configuration (as 
per Greg request), which is almost finished, the hardest part is done. A 
couple of macros and removal of useless function arguments replaced with 
config set and we should be done. If everything went I expected it 
should be finished in a couple of days, is that ok for you ?


> Oh: Dirk has done a good job at working on doxygen, so we will have an
> up-to-date doc page for the release (http://www.nongnu.org/lwip/) :-))
> 
> ... and: we might have to work on the UPGRADING document to help users
> upgrading from 1.4.x to 2.0.0 (I've added a bug for this).

Yes. I did my part for PPP a while ago. I'm unfortunately totally lost 
about all the recent IP struct and SNMP changes and I wasn't able to 
catch up by reading all (somewhat large) diffsets in place of a 
documentation, I stopped upgrading lwIP on your products at work because 
of that… I tried my best in 6746f1d1 and 47a579f5 but I'm not even sure 
it's still up to date :-)


Sylvain

signature.asc
Description: Digital signature