Some more packaging issues...

There is currently no man page for binaries (xeno-config, 
xeno-info, xeno-load and xeno-test), but there should.

It would be nice to build the documentation when building the 
packages. Patrick, you wrote that it is not possible to build 
the documentation using packages available in Debian. Could you 
explain that please? This should be fixed.

In addition, I am wondering if it could be useful to package 
every skin in a separate package, e.g. libxenomai-posix, 
libxenomai-rtdm, etc.
What do you think about that?
This would imply to have also one module source package for every 
skin (e.g. xenomai-posix-source, xenomai-rtdm-source, etc.), and 
to be careful about dependencies between modules, but it can be 
That way, the I-am-dreaming-for packages for RTnet would directly 
depend on xenomai-rtdm-source and libxenomai-rtdm.

There is also an issue about some compile-time flags. I think 
that there is no risk in enabling and packaging every skin, but 
how about --enable-x86-sep and --enable-smi-workaround ???
What should be enabled by default (in the standard package)?
Should we make several different packages compiled with the 
different options? How about the many combinations of 
--enable-periodic-smi, --enable-intel-usb2-smi, --enable-mc-smi, 
etc., etc.?!
From a user/packager point of view, it would be much better if 
those flags were kernel module parameters, and to have only 
package / set of modules to deal with. Is it possible to make 
that change? Would the runtime penalty be acceptable?
As for --enable-x86-sep, I guess that it is safe to disable it by 
default, wether or not users use NTPL, but can someone confirm 

Romain Lenglet

Reply via email to