On Wed, Feb 19, 2020 at 6:29 PM Joel Sherrill <j...@rtems.org> wrote: > > > > On Wed, Feb 19, 2020, 6:12 PM John Millard <jmill...@sprynet.com> wrote: >> >> Greetings: >> >> I took Joel’s week-long class in June. > > > :) Thanks. Hope you enjoyed it. > >> I’m currently retired and looking for a project, but clearly not a GSoC guy. >> The default list of tickets is mostly old or currently assigned. > > > Currently assigned may not mean as much as you think. It is often done by > someone to direct the ticket to who wrote the code. I know I often file > tickets where I have looked into who is most likely to fix it and assign it > to them. > > For example, I need to file a ticket for breakages building rtems-examples > using waf. And when you build RTEMS using rtems6 tools, there are breakages > because rtems5 is not replaced with rtems6 is still in some places. I > reported both I think this week to devel. > >> The “open projects” page looks more relevant. I can buy hardware if somewhat >> reasonably priced. Having actual hardware would be somewhat preferred, even >> if qemu is amazing. I can do assembly (most familiar with Intel, but open to >> learning), low-level C down to the hardware, and have experience with OS >> level programming and drivers, serial and network transport, debuggers. > > > If that's the direction you want to go in, the x86_64 port and bsp are > incomplete. There should be plenty of room to get things working. This would > help ween us off of depending on legacy boot PCs. > +1
And so far few students to work on it, and it is a big area to work on. There is also an open project to improve legacy x86: https://devel.rtems.org/ticket/2900 >> >> Is there some priority on the projects? They are all equal, but some are >> more equal than others. I can guess the scope on some of them. > > > For the most part, there isn't much priority. If you ask different people, > you will likely get different answers. > >> >> Suggestions welcome. >> >> John >> —where there are tools, a will, and a will to build tools there is a way >> >> _________________________________ >> >> devel mailing list >> devel@rtems.org >> http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> devel mailing list >> devel@rtems.org >> http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel > > _______________________________________________ > devel mailing list > devel@rtems.org > http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@rtems.org http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
