Argonne National Laboratory

Experimental Physics and
Industrial Control System

2002  2003  2004  2005  2006  2007  2008  2009  2010  2011  2012  2013  2014  2015  2016  2017  <20182019  2020  2021  Index 2002  2003  2004  2005  2006  2007  2008  2009  2010  2011  2012  2013  2014  2015  2016  2017  <20182019  2020  2021 
<== Date ==> <== Thread ==>

Subject: Re: RTEMS-5 integration
From: Ralph Lange <ralph.lange@gmx.de>
To: Benjamin Franksen <benjamin.franksen@helmholtz-berlin.de>
Cc: EPICS Core Talk <core-talk@aps.anl.gov>
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2018 17:34:14 +0200
The repositories of the modules (core, libcom, database, ca) that were separate branches on the epics-core repo have been merged (recombined), without changing the file structure.
The resulting new-focus-of-attention branch is called '7.0' (in line with the other release series' branch names).

You can try to merge the request for core straight into 7.0 - in that case the structure has not changed.

For the libcom request, the underlying structure has changed, so you would either have to move everything into modules/libcom on the proposal branch before trying to merge, or create a set of patch files that you can try to apply to a 7.0 clone while being in modules/libcom.

Lots of overhead, I know. But it is the only merge request that is affected.

Cheers,
~Ralph


On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 5:24 PM Benjamin Franksen <benjamin.franksen@helmholtz-berlin.de> wrote:
On 06/26/2018 01:40 PM, Ralph Lange wrote:
> Merge Proposals are at
> https://code.launchpad.net/epics-base/+activereviews

Thanks.

> Heinz' RTEMS branch needs some clean-up and minimization - there are
> comments in the merge proposals that name some places.

Okay, I have read Michael's comments.

> Note that the two MPs are actually one (again), as we recently
> dropped the split-up of repo-branches for the modules formerly known
> as EPICS V3.

Nice. It looks as if the rtems5 branch is a bit behind, though, it still
has submodules for these parts.

> I was volunteering to help him do this, but it would actually be
> great if you could jump in. My arguments (same language and time
> zone) cover you in the same way, and you have a much better
> justification (as ITER does not intend to use RTEMS).

The first thing to do would be to bring the rtems5 branch up to date
with core/master. I tried to merge hj/rtems5 which succeeded but of
course that gave me only a few changes in configure. I then tried to
merge hj/rtems5libcom but that failed horribly with thousands of
rename/delete conflicts. My git-fu is rather weak so I guess my naive
attempts were doomed from the beginning...

Cheers
Ben
--
"Make it so they have to reboot after every typo." ― Scott Adams


Replies:
Re: RTEMS-5 integration Williams Jr., Ernest L.
References:
RTEMS-5 integration Benjamin Franksen
Re: RTEMS-5 integration Ralph Lange
Re: RTEMS-5 integration Benjamin Franksen

Navigate by Date:
Prev: Re: RTEMS-5 integration Benjamin Franksen
Next: Re: RTEMS-5 integration Williams Jr., Ernest L.
Index: 2002  2003  2004  2005  2006  2007  2008  2009  2010  2011  2012  2013  2014  2015  2016  2017  <20182019  2020  2021 
Navigate by Thread:
Prev: Re: RTEMS-5 integration Benjamin Franksen
Next: Re: RTEMS-5 integration Williams Jr., Ernest L.
Index: 2002  2003  2004  2005  2006  2007  2008  2009  2010  2011  2012  2013  2014  2015  2016  2017  <20182019  2020  2021 
ANJ, 26 Jun 2018 Valid HTML 4.01! · Home · News · About · Base · Modules · Extensions · Distributions · Download ·
· Search · EPICS V4 · IRMIS · Talk · Bugs · Documents · Links · Licensing ·