Re: [Emc-developers] Compiling with kernel 2.6.5

[Paul <bd...@nt...>]

Hi Kirill

On Wednesday 23 June 2004 10:28 pm, Kirill 'Big K' Katsnelson wrote:
> >  A patch to fix a (perceived) problem in the kernel make system is not a
> > path I would want to follow.
>
> ???  Why?  This is just a small part of the vanilla kernel patch 2.6.5 to
> 2.6.6.  2.6.6 and beyond would not require it since it is already
> "applied" in a sense.

I must admit I haven't been following the development of the 2.6 kernel - 
Been out of the loop for a while.

> Does an RTLinux version exist for kernel 2.6?  I was assuming it was
> abandoned in 2000 or something - at least the version "freely"
> "available" from fmslabs.com looks like it is.

The last I heard on this front was the adoption of the adeos patch for 2.6 
support. A quick look at the rtlinux-gpl cvs logs would indicate that 
progress is slow to non-existant on this front. However, I wouldn't discount 
the prospect of further development.

> Anyway, patching the kernel build system feels rude to me, too.  There
> are also some technical non-problems with it, <snip>
>  What so you think about adopting it?  The rationale here
> is that it will give us uncomplicated and 2.6.6+ compatible makefiles,
> so with the kernel 2.6.6, we can use its build system for modules only,
> and with lesser kernels, would use the adopted one?

I'm all for a simple build system. The majority of the sources are either 
user space or kernel code - Only a couple of files really need to be compiled 
for both (posemath.c springs to mind..). However, I have little interest or 
incentive in embarking on a new build structure for the emc/rcslib trees. I 
would rather devote time and effort to the emc2 tree where (hopefully) the 
layout is more conducive to a 2.6 build.

Regards, Paul.

-- 

"To err is human...to really f*** things up requires the root password."
From a collection of quotes at http://www.indigo.org/quotes.html