From: John Dallaway <john@dallaway.org.uk>
To: eCos development list <ecos-devel@ecos.sourceware.org>
Cc: Simon Kallweit <simon.kallweit@intefo.ch>, John Eigelaar <john@kses.net>
Subject: CDL interfaces for eCos networking
Date: Tue, 12 May 2009 15:48:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4A099A39.1060606@dallaway.org.uk> (raw)
I've noticed that the common networking infrastructure package
(CYGPKG_NET) declares the same CDL interfaces as the lwIP package
(CYGPKG_NET_LWIP):
cdl_interface CYGPKG_NET_STACK
cdl_interface CYGPKG_NET_STACK_INET
cdl_interface CYGPKG_NET_STACK_INET6
Presumably these interface declarations were placed in CYGPKG_NET at a
time when it was assumed that _all_ networking stack implementations
would use that package.
Now we have the lwIP stack which does not use CYGPKG_NET. If a developer
attempts to load both CYGPKG_NET and CYGPKG_NET_LWIP into a single eCos
configuration, libCDL reports errors due to duplicate cdl_interface
declarations. Of course it's unlikely to be sensible to load both these
packages, but that's not the point - the naming clash should be fixed.
Are these cdl_interfaces intended to indicate the availability of _any_
networking stack or specifically one that provides a BSD sockets API?
At present, the only packages that "require" these interfaces are HTTPD
and Microwindows. I expect that both these packages require BSD sockets.
In that case, I propose that we eliminate the CDL interface declarations
from the lwIP stack. Any future packages which depend on one of the
lwIP-specific stack APIs can simply "require CYGPKG_NET_LWIP".
Comments?
John Dallaway
next reply other threads:[~2009-05-12 15:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-05-12 15:48 John Dallaway [this message]
2009-05-12 17:00 ` Bart Veer
2009-05-14 12:19 ` John Dallaway
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4A099A39.1060606@dallaway.org.uk \
--to=john@dallaway.org.uk \
--cc=ecos-devel@ecos.sourceware.org \
--cc=john@kses.net \
--cc=simon.kallweit@intefo.ch \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).