Hey there Maarten, thanks for interest in NuttX! In the best scenario we would want to bring back alive what is already in the code base :-)
-- CeDeROM, SQ7MHZ, http://www.tomek.cedro.info On Thu, Mar 5, 2026 at 9:24 AM Maarten Zanders <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi, > > I have a couple of old devboards that I want to use in an experiment - > Olimexino-STM32 - based on STM32F103RB. They are supported in NuttX > but no documentation - so I wrote an extensive description. > Unfortunately, none of the provided defconfigs are actually working: > at each boot you're greeted with a backtrace. The (non-default) stack > sizes are too small but, when increasing those, other things seem to > be missing as well. Seems like NuttX evolved but nobody has been using > these boards since a long time. There is also a lot of clutter in > the defconfigs. > > So I started from scratch for a minimal NSH. Went further and tried to > get USB composite up and running but after a day of fiddling I have to > conclude that it's too much to ask from this chip with 20kB of RAM - > at least without heavy tuning. As I don't need it myself, I won't be > pursuing this any further. > > Now I'm wondering what's the best way to move forward? Is it OK to > just delete code & configs that are not working anymore? I would then > provide a clean base to start derived work from (but only a subset of > current defconfigs). > Or just mark what's there as "not functional" and move on? > > Cheers! > Maarten
