From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 9153 invoked by alias); 18 Mar 2003 08:47:29 -0000 Mailing-List: contact ecos-maintainers-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: ecos-maintainers-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 9115 invoked from network); 18 Mar 2003 08:47:28 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" From: John Dallaway To: ecos-maintainers@sources.redhat.com Subject: Patches for the eCos 2.0 branch Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 08:47:00 -0000 User-Agent: KMail/1.4.3 Organization: eCosCentric Limited MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Message-Id: <200303180848.24682.jld@ecoscentric.com> X-SW-Source: 2003-03/txt/msg00009.txt.bz2 [ moving from ecos-patches to ecos-maintainers ] Gary, Nick and all Nick Garnett wrote: > Gary Thomas writes: >> You know me - I'm always interested in more [debug] information :-) >> By all means, apply this, and the QUICC changes as well. > Currently I have applied this only to the trunk, since the v2.0 branch > does not have the changes that you made to the CPM/DPRAM allocator. > Were you going to apply these to the v2 branch, was there some reason > not to do that? If you are awaiting approval consider it given. To avoid invalidating beta testing, we need to be very careful about what goes into the 2.0 branch. Does the CPM/DPRAM allocator patch address a known problem or is it purely delivering a new feature? I would like to see some more formal consensus among the maintainers on what goes in to the 2.0 branch from here on. John Dallaway