etherboot-developers

[Etherboot-developers] etherboot-5.1.2rc6

[<ke...@us...>]

Ok, I have put this at

	http://www.etherboot.org/etherboot-5.1.2rc6.tar.bz2

I'm thinking perhaps this could be the last or next to last RC, what do
you think Eric, do you have more patches to go in?

I have not done any testing on it aside from verifying that it compiles
(in the default configuration). Maybe I should make up a checklist of
features to be checked (types of images, common NICs, commonly chosen
defines) and post to this list and testers can report on success or
failure, is this a good idea?

There are quite a few warnings from my gcc, mostly about unused
variables, are these worth fixing Eric?

Re: [Etherboot-developers] etherboot-5.1.2rc6

[<ebi...@ln...>]

ke...@us... writes:

> Ok, I have put this at
> 
> 	http://www.etherboot.org/etherboot-5.1.2rc6.tar.bz2
> 
> I'm thinking perhaps this could be the last or next to last RC, what do
> you think Eric, do you have more patches to go in?

I have one change on my todo queue.  But it hasn't been written yet,
and is LinuxBIOS specific so it can easily go in later.
 
> I have not done any testing on it aside from verifying that it compiles
> (in the default configuration). Maybe I should make up a checklist of
> features to be checked (types of images, common NICs, commonly chosen
> defines) and post to this list and testers can report on success or
> failure, is this a good idea?

Sounds good to me.  This kind of thing probably works best against
a development release so it is easy to go back in cvs and verify the
code. 
 
> There are quite a few warnings from my gcc, mostly about unused
> variables, are these worth fixing Eric?

Probably.  What happened is someone a while ago turned off warnings
about unused variables.  I added a macro __unused (to supress the warning
in bogus places) and fixed the worst spurious reporters.  And then
I renabled the warnings.  If the variables are truly unused we can kill
them and make etherboot just a little bit smaller.

Eric