From: John Dallaway <john@dallaway.org.uk>
To: Jonathan Larmour <jifl@eCosCentric.com>
Cc: ecos-maintainers@ecos.sourceware.org
Subject: Re: Orphan packages
Date: Sun, 01 Feb 2009 09:46:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <49856F6B.7060308@dallaway.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4984CFFB.3010906@eCosCentric.com>
Hi Jifl
Jonathan Larmour wrote:
>> There are currently 4 eCos packages in the repository with no
>> corresponding package record in ecos.db:
>>
>> CYGPKG_HAL_OPENRISC at hal/openrisc/arch
>> CYGPKG_HAL_OPENRISC_ORP at hal/openrisc/orp
>> CYGPKG_DEVS_FLASH_OPENRISC_ORP at devs/flash/openrisc/orp
>> CYGPKG_DEVS_FLASH_SST_39VF400 at devs/flash/sst/39vf400
>>
>> Such orphan packages will not be present in the forthcoming release, but
>> does anyone have a good reason to keep any of them in the repository at
>> all? If these packages might be useful to someone then they should each
>> have a corresponding package record in ecos.db which includes details of
>> their status. Otherwise, even regular eCos users may not be aware of
>> their existence. If no-one cares about these packages, I suggest we
>> remove them from the repository for reasons of consistency.
>
> I know there are outstanding patches for the openrisc stuff stuck way
> way back in the patch backlog. The packages should not be deleted.
OK.
> I
> know from the lists that some people have been using the openrisc port,
> which means they must be using them with the patches applied. I
> definitely don't expect we will reach the point of reviewing (with
> possible subsequent modifications) the patches before 3.0, so I think
> the status quo will have to do.
OK, but perhaps we should add corresponding package records (with
suitable caveats in the description field) after branching for eCos 3.0.
There are other packages in the repository which have a broadly similar
status but have a package record so people are much more likely to be
aware of their presence.
> The latter package appears obsoleted by the SST_39VFXXX package so can
> probably go, although I have slight hesitation to do this because
> third-party ports could be using it. Doesn't seem worth keeping though.
ACK. Any users of the package will be aware that it's not a current
package due to the lack of a package record in ecos.db. Of course, the
code will still be in the CVS attic.
John Dallaway
prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-02-01 9:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-01-31 21:04 John Dallaway
2009-01-31 22:26 ` Jonathan Larmour
2009-02-01 9:46 ` John Dallaway [this message]
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=49856F6B.7060308@dallaway.org.uk \
--to=john@dallaway.org.uk \
--cc=ecos-maintainers@ecos.sourceware.org \
--cc=jifl@eCosCentric.com \
/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).