From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 31843 invoked by alias); 5 May 2009 11:29:00 -0000 Received: (qmail 31835 invoked by uid 22791); 5 May 2009 11:29:00 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail01.solnet.ch (HELO mail01.solnet.ch) (212.101.4.135) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 05 May 2009 11:28:54 +0000 Received: from mail01.solnet.ch ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail01.solnet.ch [127.0.0.1]) (SolNet-Check, port 10024) with LMTP id udt9a8W20aSZ; Tue, 5 May 2009 11:28:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from beta.intefo.ch (static-212-101-18-64.adsl.solnet.ch [212.101.18.64]) by mail01.solnet.ch (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5AC624B5BC; Tue, 5 May 2009 11:28:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from beta.intefo.ch ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (beta.intefo.ch [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id ZEqobNE2jdCA; Tue, 5 May 2009 13:28:50 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [192.168.1.20] (simon.intefo.ch [192.168.1.20]) by beta.intefo.ch (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE794770036; Tue, 5 May 2009 13:28:50 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <4A0022F9.5020207@intefo.ch> Date: Tue, 05 May 2009 11:29:00 -0000 From: Simon Kallweit User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (X11/20090318) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: John Dallaway CC: eCos development list , John Eigelaar Subject: Re: lwIP upgrade to CVS HEAD References: <49F83C8B.9000108@intefo.ch> <4A001575.1060107@dallaway.org.uk> In-Reply-To: <4A001575.1060107@dallaway.org.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact ecos-devel-help@ecos.sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: ecos-devel-owner@ecos.sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2009-05/txt/msg00001.txt.bz2 John Dallaway wrote: >> * sys.h: Added an include. I don't know if this really is necessary. >> Will check with the lwIP mailing list. >> * init.c: Removed a check for PPP in NO_SYS mode, which is not valid >> with my current PPP changes. >> * ppp: I did some work on the PPP code, added polling support, added >> pppdump support. As said earlier, this is currently quite a mess, and I >> think we should work on the lwIP port first, not focusing on PPP. > > Yes, let's focus on getting a clean port of the lwIP with solid ethernet > support committed. If I understand correctly, PPP support in the master > lwIP sources has some problems at present. Fixing the PPP support sounds > like a separate project to me. Totally agreed. >> Well, that's it. Not many changes at all, and I think with some commits >> to the lwIP repository we can use the pure lwIP code with no changes at >> all. Getting PPP right on the other hand, will need some serious work. > > Do you know if anyone in the lwIP community is intending to work on the > PPP support in the near future? No, currently there is nobody intending to work on it. With the latest commits to lwIP, PPP even got broken in a few places. Ultimately, someone should take the current pppd sources which the lwIP PPP port is originally based on and adapt to them. But this is quite a bit of work. > I will review the CDL. Good to hear :) > The sequential API is required for the socket API and desirable in its > own right as it provides a good compromise between ease of use and > memory footprint. John Eigelaar has indicated that he would be willing > to help with this and already has a copyright assignment in place. Any help is appreciated. I will gladly help testing and do work on this too, when there is need. But I would like to have John Eigelaar commit his changes and go from there instead of going from scratch. > We will need more functionality in place before we can replace the > existing lwIP port in the eCos repository trunk. We could use your own > tree or we could cut a branch in the eCos repository. I would prefer to > branch the eCos repository as this would enhance visibility within the > eCos community, gives a better sense of shared ownership, and allows the > eCos maintainers to monitor progress more easily. Be assured that I am > keen to support this lwIP port update and will ensure that patches are > committed to the branch quickly. I think that's a good idea. Simon