This is the mail archive of the ecos-devel@sourceware.org mailing list for the eCos project.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
b) Compatibility with eCos applications using the existing eCos lwIPHmm, I didn't really focus on that. I agree that CDL names should be
1.1.1 package if possible (API and existing CDL option names
preserved)
identical as far as possible. Otherwise I'm not sure (initialization
etc.) if this really matters as long as it's documented well.
If it's just a case of making a different API call to initialise the
stack then I agree this is no problem.
d) Absolutely minimal mangling of the lwIP sources (it should be easy toMangling is very minimal for these exact reasons, except the PPP sources
upgrade lwIP again in the future)
which were changed quite a bit.
Has the PPP support in the current lwIP code regressed relative to lwIP 1.1.1? If there have been serious regressions, we will need to consider how to manage the transition for users of the existing eCos lwIP package.
If you consider your own fixes for PPP to be just a hack then we might
also consider focussing on ethernet for now and tacking PPP as a
separate activity.
Perhaps the best way forward is for John Eigelaar to take SimonI think we should first discuss my port a little and see if it needs to
Kallweit's package, work on the sequential API initially and post his
revised package for review and further work by others. Simon, is the
lwIP package in your repository ready for handoff?
be changed to fit the needs of others.
Sure. What aspects do you think need discussion?
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |