From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 27835 invoked by alias); 16 Mar 2011 18:18:18 -0000 Received: (qmail 27823 invoked by uid 22791); 16 Mar 2011 18:18:16 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mtaout03-winn.ispmail.ntl.com (HELO mtaout03-winn.ispmail.ntl.com) (81.103.221.49) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 16 Mar 2011 18:18:11 +0000 Received: from aamtaout04-winn.ispmail.ntl.com ([81.103.221.35]) by mtaout03-winn.ispmail.ntl.com (InterMail vM.7.08.04.00 201-2186-134-20080326) with ESMTP id <20110316181808.IIPC13167.mtaout03-winn.ispmail.ntl.com@aamtaout04-winn.ispmail.ntl.com>; Wed, 16 Mar 2011 18:18:08 +0000 Received: from cog.dallaway.org.uk ([213.106.80.48]) by aamtaout04-winn.ispmail.ntl.com (InterMail vG.3.00.04.00 201-2196-133-20080908) with ESMTP id <20110316181808.NPUS25656.aamtaout04-winn.ispmail.ntl.com@cog.dallaway.org.uk>; Wed, 16 Mar 2011 18:18:08 +0000 Received: from cog.dallaway.org.uk (cog.dallaway.org.uk [127.0.0.1]) by cog.dallaway.org.uk (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p2GII62p015253; Wed, 16 Mar 2011 18:18:06 GMT Message-ID: <4D80FEDE.4020106@dallaway.org.uk> Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2011 18:18:00 -0000 From: John Dallaway User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (X11/20101213) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: uni@martinlaabs.de CC: ecos-devel@ecos.sourceware.org Subject: Re: eCos on AT91SAM9 - call to action References: <4D809BF2.6040205@dallaway.org.uk> <4D80EE4C.3090703@mailbox.tu-dresden.de> In-Reply-To: <4D80EE4C.3090703@mailbox.tu-dresden.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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: 2011-03/txt/msg00008.txt.bz2 Hi Martin Martin Laabs wrote: > my port based on the one of Evgeniy Dushitov at the very beginning. > However - after some weeks I discovered that it was very hard to support > more CPUs out of the AT91SAM9 family with that code-base. > So I started from beginning, reusing only some code snipplet from > Evgeniy. I made the decision to split the port into three packages. [ snip ] It sounds like your input will be valuable. Please do track the discussion in bug 1000819 and comment where appropriate. To be clear, I still think it makes sense that we focus on Evgeniy's contribution and modify it where necessary during the review. John Dallaway eCos maintainer http://www.dallaway.org.uk/john