On 23/11/19 1:49 am, Sebastian Huber wrote: > Hello, > > I converted all BSPs to the new build system. I was able to build the tests > for > all BSPs without POSIX and networking (my system was busy for approx. 8h). I > will do build runs with POSIX and networking enabled next week.
Nice and well done. > I think the build system structure is quite good. With the script items you > can > also do complicated special case build steps, e.g. > > https://git.rtems.org/sebh/rtems.git/tree/spec/build/bsps/powerpc/motorola_powerpc/RTEMS-BUILD-BSP-POWERPC-MOTOROLAPOWERPC-BOOT.yml?h=build Interesting and useful. In relation to the `cflags` as shown in this fragment are the flags ever separated into types, that is debug, optimise, machine, warnings etc? I think it is important to have the separation so we can export the flags as types in a pkgconfig file. A user can combine them in ways that suite them, for example some 3rd party packages cannot be built with the warning flags RTEMS has. > For 99% of the jobs the standard items are fine. > > Open issues: > > * Convert tests which use pax, see latest patches sent to mailing list: > > https://lists.rtems.org/pipermail/devel/2019-November/056197.html I reviewed the patch but I must have missed how this resolves the pax issue. How is that done? > With these patches I think I am able to convert all C/C++ tests. > > * Ada tests > > * User manual documentation > > * Licensing of *.yml files > > * Generation of the old Makefile support > > * Generation of pkg-config files >> https://lists.rtems.org/pipermail/devel/2019-November/056209.html > > For the latest documentation proposals see: > > https://ftp.rtems.org/pub/rtems/people/sebh/eng.pdf > > https://ftp.rtems.org/pub/rtems/people/sebh/user.pdf I would like to see if we can fix the latex generation on your machine if that is OK? > The RTEMS Software Engineering parts are ready to commit from my point of > view. I have not reviewed these, I hope someone else does. > In the User Manual the quick start chapter is ready to commit (there was not > much to do). I added a new chapter "Build System". Please check if the chapter > placement is all right. I will add the content in the next week or so. Looks good, so much simpler. Should there be a note or something about waf needing python and we recommend python3? Plus waf needs a `python` installed and not just `python2` or `python3`? How would a user adjust a BSP setting, for example the optimisation to -O1 to debug? A simple example would be nice. I see cannot see how as there is nothing in the INI file except building the tests. > We have to decide how we continue with the integration. I would merge > everything > in one patch into the RTEMS sources. This patch is too big to review. Does this mean all the specs are added in that same patch? > Then I > would add a configuration option to the old configure script (e.g. > "--I-only-want-to-compare-results-with-the-new-build-system"). This basically > disables the normal use. The new build system should be used, fixed and > improved. In a three month period we keep the old build system in the sources. > Afterwards we remove it completely. I am fine with this. We could also remove the autotools building from the RSB (yippy) when the old build system is removed. Chris _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@rtems.org http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
