>That is the usual approach but again, not easy. You need to track >modules and versions so that you can know if things will fit together >at the end. I would hold this part to the very end, after the >architecture of the modules is well understood.
>Good, but let's keep that for later. The approaches taken in nano and >pico bsd of using the build system itself are a good start. Yes that is the idee, from source, just like the port tree. >Doxygen can help us here, but it will take a bit of horsepower for the >whole kernel. Take a look at the doxygen docs and you'll see that it >will generate this. We just have to be careful not to do it from root >and then to annotate the code to fix errors in the automatic >generation phase. i'm looking into it... but i must admit it's a mistery to me right now. >So, that's fine. I think the documentation/cutting up step has to >come first, which is often frustrating to people who like to mostly >code, but I just don't see a way around making the map. I dont have a problem with that, I just need a good starting point. and something to look for. >How much time do you think you have to put into this? A couple of hours a day, mostly after 7:00pm EST You seem to have more knowlage than I do here, would you like to take lead in this project? Something i want to calrify, it is not just about the kernel and it's drivers"modules" tought it is the starting point of the system, i also want to map the system features like networking ppp, bluetooth, mostly everything that ships with the system sources that is not already into a port tree or a package.
_______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-small To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
