Re: NAND & YAFFS

[cetoni GmbH - Uwe Kindler <uwe.kindler@cetoni.de>]

Hi,

I completely agree with Rutgers opinion about his development of eCos 
NAND support. 
(http://ecos.sourceware.org/ml/ecos-maintainers/2009-05/msg00011.html).
I think the situation is very disappointing for him.

He invested a lot of work and time, he made his project public very 
early and he carefully designed the NAND flash IO and device layers. 
Because his work was public from the beginning, anyone could contribute, 
criticize or help. At the moment his implementation is the only one I 
know in detail and the only one that is public accessible. Furthermore 
its NAND framework is already used and known by other eCos community 
members. So at the moment I tend to say, Rutgers implementation is the 
current eCos NAND framework.

I think before we decide if some parts of eCosCentrics NAND 
implementation can be used, we should carefully check both 
implementations and discuss pros and cons. To do this we would need 
public access to the eCosCentric NAND implementation as soon as possible.

Furthermore I would like to know from eCosCentric in some short words, 
why their NAND implementation/design is better than Rutgers 
implementation. If this is not relizable within some days, we should 
stay with Rutgers implementation to get working NAND support as fast as 
possible.


Kind regards,

Dipl. Inf. (FH)
Uwe Kindler
Software Engineering

--

cetoni GmbH
Am Wiesenring 6
D-07554 Korbussen

Tel.: +49 (0) 36602 338 28
Fax:  +49 (0) 36602 338 11
uwe.kindler@cetoni.de
http://www.cetoni.de