From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 10284 invoked by alias); 19 Aug 2009 12:10:54 -0000 Received: (qmail 10274 invoked by uid 22791); 19 Aug 2009 12:10:53 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail04.solnet.ch (HELO mail04.solnet.ch) (212.101.4.138) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 19 Aug 2009 12:10:45 +0000 Received: from mail04.solnet.ch ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail04.solnet.ch [127.0.0.1]) (SolNet-Check, port 10024) with LMTP id 9w9ATtGE+x1j; Wed, 19 Aug 2009 12:10:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from beta.intefo.ch (static-212-101-18-64.adsl.solnet.ch [212.101.18.64]) by mail04.solnet.ch (Postfix) with ESMTP id BAD3687511; Wed, 19 Aug 2009 12:09:59 +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 8x4eNMTS9PA6; Wed, 19 Aug 2009 14:09:59 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [192.168.1.20] (simon.intefo.ch [192.168.1.20]) by beta.intefo.ch (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B5477700F7; Wed, 19 Aug 2009 14:09:59 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <4A8BEBB1.1080504@intefo.ch> Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2009 12:10:00 -0000 From: Simon Kallweit User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.22 (X11/20090608) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: John Dallaway CC: ecos-devel@ecos.sourceware.org Subject: Re: lwIP port status References: <4A1173B6.5000805@intefo.ch> <24603788.post@talk.nabble.com> <4A66F713.5030700@intefo.ch> <4A8ADDED.5010400@dallaway.org.uk> <4A8AE5D2.4050305@intefo.ch> <4A8BA58D.8020805@dallaway.org.uk> In-Reply-To: <4A8BA58D.8020805@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: 2009-08/txt/msg00028.txt.bz2 John Dallaway wrote: > Hi Simon and all > > Simon Kallweit wrote: > >> John Dallaway schrieb: >> >>> Having reviewed the lwIP ChangeLog, I think it makes sense to simply >>> replace the older lwIP port in the eCos CVS trunk (tagging the >>> repository before the commit). There are known issues with lwIP PPP >>> which need to be addressed upstream. In the meantime, eCos users wishing >>> to work with lwIP PPP should be better off hacking on the lwIP 1.3.1 >>> stack where necessary rather than using the older port. >> I think this is the way to go. There is already some hacking on PPP in >> my port, which could lead to some confusion, as it is not identical to >> the lwIP codebase. Also it does only work in a polled environment like >> mine, so it might not be much use of the broad community. I don't know >> how we should proceed with this? > > Perhaps it would be preferable to publish your PPP-related changes as a > patch for the time being and keep the CVS sources as close to the master > lwIP code as possible. That sounds like a good idea. I'll look into it. I'll do the merge with the newest lwip sources tomorrow and release the package. Simon