Hi Zack, Nice to see you got through that. Right now we are actually transitioning the new build system into place. It would be great if you can try it out now with your BSP build and report any feedback/problems you may encounter.
BSP documentation involves a combination of looking at code or data sheets. Some of our BSPs lack documentation. Then you can create new documentation for example by comparing to other well-documented BSPs and comparing the code bases. It can be a nice exercise. We also have a discussion ongoing about coding style. There was an idea by Peter Dufault about how we can sanity check an uncrustify configuration. You can find/follow the thread name "New coding style for new files?" on the mailing list from this month (September 2020). That can give you some insight. It could be something you may be capable of doing. That thread also contains a link to an uncrustify configuration that was previously created to try to be consistent with the RTEMS coding style. Gedare On Mon, Sep 14, 2020 at 9:49 AM zacchaeusliang <zacchaeusli...@protonmail.com> wrote: > > > Hello, > So I finally fixed the BSP problems! I'm able to I'm looking into > contributing and I'm really excited to dive into the code. I think the GCC > testing Issues is a bit to difficult as I don't have the background for it. > Are there some issues I can patch and resolve easily? Also, I read on the > mailing list I heard that editing BSP documentation helps me get to know the > code but I'm a bit skeptical because there few places that require me to look > at the code. Rather it relies on reading the documentation(datasheets) of the > board (I may be wrong). > > > Thanks > zack > > _______________________________________________ > 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
