I think Greg avoided using submodules because there are many issues caused by it.
In fact submodules could avoid this issue, but maybe we could have some marks indicating the last commit expected on apps/ to the current nuttx/ This way if someone git pull the nuttx/ and forgot to git pull the apps/ the make will detect it and will ask the user to do it. I don't like this approach because it makes things more rigid (inflexible). This is not something easy to fix. BR, Alan On Thu, Jul 4, 2024 at 7:08 PM Nathan Hartman <hartman.nat...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Jul 4, 2024 at 5:21 PM Alan C. Assis <acas...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Nice post for a guy (apparently with previous Linux experience, that type > > of person normally find their way well on NuttX) moving from baremetal to > > RTOS: > > > > https://blog.brixit.nl/moving-to-a-rtos-on-the-rp2040/ > > > > The issue he commented about "make distclean" not working is serious and > we > > need to find a solution to work transparently. Instead of cloning nuttx > and > > apps again and again as he just did, I just remove the .config and run > > ./tools/configure.sh again without problem. > > > > But obviously it is not the ideal solution, we need to find a way to keep > > apps and nuttx in sync or at least no mess with our users. > > > > BR, > > > > Alan > > > > Could do a third repository which uses nuttx and apps as submodules? > > > > > >
