Hi Seb,
Sebastien Lelong wrote:
> I've uploaded, in the group's file section, 4 release packages, for testing
> purpose. Please DO NOT distribute it, it's just for our "internal" use (ok,
> this groups is public...). It still needs work, it just to give an idea of
> how it'd look.
All 4 packages expand correctly here, directory structure looks OK to
me. About the name of the packages: is the '-dev' in the name just for
testing and will is disappear in the real release?
(and why '-' not '_' ?)
>
> * since the validated map is still empty, I've build it using the
> unvalidated map. As a consequence, there are all device files, all
> libraries. Once the validated map is filled, I'll generate these package
> again.
> * the jallib-devices is also built using the unvalidated map, and it will
> *always* be built on the unvalidated map. It contains all device files, and
> all blink files.
> * there are zip and tar.gz files, so 4 packages. zip and tar.gz are
> strictly the same. We'll release all, for both win and *nix (and ecom) guys.
All acceptable to me.
> * to generate these packages:
>
> cd ..../tools
> make clean
> make release VERSION=dev_20081015 ENV=unvalidated
> [wait]
> cd distrib
> ls *.tar.gz
> ls *.zip
> [wow]
>
> Releasing for real would be done like this:
>
> make release VERSION=0.1beta ENV=validated
I had not intention to do this, but it is also impossible on my eCS
system because of the Linux specific commands in the makefile.
Q: I thought the command lines in a makefile must start with a tab
character for GNU make. Not (anymore)?
> Here I made TODO list. Feel free to correct it, add more, etc... This would
> be very helpful to know which issue/point/decision/etc... still need to be
> dealt with. Since we decide to release, lots of "sleeping" points have come
> at the surface, which is good. Now, we have to deal with them so we can Get
> Things Done, and Release ! :)
I think I have to give priority to the device files to get the blink
files working. I expect to need quite some time for a solution for the
pragma fuse_def for the 18Fs. That is when I try to fix the dev2jal
script. An intermediate solution could be to validate/release only some
specific 18F device files. Eur has proposed some (3 IIRC), but is that
be 'good enough' for the first beta? Personally I would like to release
more, but that requires more time!
> TODO, for the beta:
> * README file for device files and blink files. It will selectively be
> included into the jalliv-devices package.
Should the readme for the device files contain different info or be an
ASCII-text subset of 'devicefiles.html'?
Regards, Rob.
--
Rob Hamerling, Vianen, NL (http://www.robh.nl/)
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"jallib" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/jallib?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
