[riot-devel] qemu-i386 port

Ludwig Knüpfer ludwig.knuepfer at fu-berlin.de
Tue Aug 9 14:30:25 CEST 2016


Hi,

Without any further insights I would say your case is different because the board is actively maintained, used, and can be bought.
In the case of the FU boards I had in mind (msb430*) none of these points is true.

Cheers,
Ludwig

Am 9. August 2016 14:21:44 MESZ, schrieb Marc <dkm+riotos at kataplop.net>:
>Hey,
>
>This discussion is also related to
>https://github.com/RIOT-OS/RIOT/pull/5412#issuecomment-237688208
>I'm trying to enhance support for ek-lm4fxl-120 board, which is not as
>popular as stm boards...
>It's a bit complicated to find reviewers with some extra time for
>reviewing, and even more for hardware testing...
>
>Would it be possible to have an in-between set of boards (between "well
>supported/tested" and "in
>the trash") ? Where reviewers could omit the hardware tests for example
>and rely on the "community"
>to do such tests ?
>
>I must admit that having to spend several weeks for each small PR is a
>bit frustrating, but I fully
>understand that nobody really cares about this board. If this is not
>possible, then maybe you're
>right and boards that can't be maintained should be ditched. People can
>still maintain their own
>fork (what I'll probably do for TivaC board).
>
>Marc
>
>August 9 2016 2:06 PM, "Ludwig Knüpfer" <ludwig.knuepfer at fu-berlin.de>
>wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>> 
>> I'm all for cleaning up stale boards, especially I'd they are as hard
>to obtain as for example the
>> FU boards.
>> If I'm not mistaken this would also enable the removal of at least
>one legacy driver interface (I
>> have some GPIO API in mind).
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> Ludwig
>> 
>> Am 9. August 2016 13:52:56 MESZ, schrieb "Joakim Nohlgård"
><joakim.nohlgard at eistec.se>:
>> 
>>> I agree with dropping qemu-i386
>>> 
>>> On the same subject, would it make sense to clean up some other
>boards
>>> with less than ideal support?
>>> chronos is one board which I frequently run into trouble with
>because
>>> it is never up to date with the other platform implementations,
>>> especially the stdio is very hacky on that board.
>>> 
>>> /Joakim
>>> 
>>> On Aug 9, 2016 12:51, "Martine Lenders" <m.lenders at fu-berlin.de>
>wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>> we now have the third person wondering about the qemu-i386 port.
>Fact
>>>> is, it doesn't work (we do not even have the unittests activated
>>>> anymore). Is there a reason why we did not drop it yet (except
>making
>>>> all the good work by René void)? Or are we planning to provide
>better
>>>> support for it in the future?
>>>> 
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Martine
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> devel mailing list
>>>> devel at riot-os.org
>>>> https://lists.riot-os.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> devel mailing list
>>> devel at riot-os.org
>>> https://lists.riot-os.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> devel mailing list
>> devel at riot-os.org
>> https://lists.riot-os.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>_______________________________________________
>devel mailing list
>devel at riot-os.org
>https://lists.riot-os.org/mailman/listinfo/devel



More information about the devel mailing list