Re: [ros-dev] rbuild and HALs module optimization

[Aleksey Bragin]

David, what does a kernel-dev have to do with rbuild?
Also, recent massive commits to the rbuild itself, and to  
various .rbuild files hardly prove your "rbuild is an umaintained  
piece of ... stuff" theory. It's, by the least measure, offensive to  
Herve's (and there were a few different patches submitted by various  
authors submitted) work he's been doing with rbuild.

Or what is a "maintained rbuild", by your definition? How more should  
it be maintained? Note: not improved (we have a number of  
improvements pending to be implemented in it), but *maintained*.

Another thing is completely wrong and counter-productive: irc is a  
wrong place for such question, since not all devs are there all the  
time.

Now, back to the actual question.
The biggest difference between ntoskrnl and HAL is that the first is  
as machine-independent as possible (still including some dependent  
code, but it's conditionally included), while the latter is actually  
very hardware dependent, so it does not make sense to unite x86 and  
PowerPC HALs, because they are going to contain just simply different  
source code.


With the best regards,
Aleksey Bragin.

On Sep 21, 2007, at 8:11 PM, David Hinz wrote:

>  
>  Marc Piulachs schrieb:
> >   Does anyone agree with me on this? Maybe I’m
> > missing something  
> >  here but
> >  I would like to improve it. 
>  I don't think you will have much luck getting an answer, as afaik  
>  rbuild
>  is currently more or less unmaintained and our kernel-dev left the  
>  project.
>
>  Maybe arty or hpoussin do have an oppinion regarding your question,  
>  but
>  they seem to be rather busy most of the time...
>
>  Have you tried asking on irc? Most devs hang out there...
>
>  Greets,
>
>  David Hinz