Rockbox.org home
release
dev builds
extras
themes manual
wiki
device status forums
mailing lists
IRC bugs
patches
dev guide



Rockbox mail archive

Subject: Re: Cowon D2 EABI

Re: Cowon D2 EABI

From: Rob Purchase <rob.purchase_at_googlemail.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 09:23:42 +0100

On 13/06/2010 23:54, Thomas Martitz wrote:
> Am 13.06.2010 23:04, schrieb Rob Purchase:
>> At the moment I do not have the new compiler installed, nor the time
>> to do so and investigate a fix. So can I ask that this change is
>> reverted until it is tested and working properly, and also that in
>> future significant changes like this aren't committed until somebody
>> has (even briefly) tested that it works? Obviously I know I haven't
>> been around here too much lately, but I'm certainly not the only
>> person on this list with access to a D2.
>
> I'm sure it can be reverted, since it has shown bad effects. But I
> would also like to ask you to sort out the problems (once you have
> some time) since we want the same gcc for all ARM targets, and this
> "dual-mode" is supposed to exist just for the transition phase.

Yes, that was the idea - revert it until I can fix the problem (probably
just a few days). Of course we want to use the same compiler for all ARM
targets, it's just the "transition phase" for this target was maybe a
bit short :)

> Also, as you just said you haven't been around lately, it's hard for
> our project, considering the growing number of targets, to wait for a
> port maintainer to actually show up and do some work. If the
> maintainer is not around, then the port is effectively not maintained.
> It can get broken if it remains unmaintained.

As I said, I'm certainly not the only Rockbox dev with access to a D2. I
resent the phrase "actually show up and do some work" - as far as I was
aware Rockbox is a volunteer effort.

> We've always told that current builds may actually be not functional
> and that you should never rely on current builds (they are not
> dependable). That's one of the reasons every target should aim for a
> stable status.

I was merely stating that we should try wherever possible to check that
commits actually work, and I don't think there's anything wrong with
that suggestion. As you are probably aware there are significant
barriers that make a "stable" D2 port an unlikely prospect (lack of
write access to the internal flash, primarily) so it is important that
the current build works in this case. Whether you like it or not, there
are numerous people who use and rely on these builds.

Rob.
Received on 2010-06-14


Page was last modified "Jan 10 2012" The Rockbox Crew
aaa