Sv: [VOTE] Apache NuttX 9.1.0 (incubating) RC0 release

+1, I checked - Signature and hash OK - LICENSE, DISCLAIMER and NOTICE exist - Build from source.Spresense board Från: Brennan Ashton Skickat: den 24 juni 2020 07:52 Till: dev@nuttx.apache.org Ämne: Re: [VOTE] Apache NuttX 9.1.0 (incubating) RC0 release Greg

Re: [VOTE] Apache NuttX 9.1.0 (incubating) RC0 release

Greg and Alan, Started looking and there are some changes in the diff in the generated config.h as can be seen here One change is the date command is no longer disabled by default. This accounts for 2304 bytes, leaving only 800 byte change. I'm not sure if changing the default was expected, but I

Re: [VOTE] Apache NuttX 9.1.0 (incubating) RC0 release

those are the bin and config diffs between 9.0 and 9.1 for Spresense board (nsh defconfig) file size 2232796 Jun 24 07:34 nuttx-9.0 2274908 Jun 24 07:31 nuttx-9.1 --- conf-9.02020-06-24 07:34:00.244923392 +0200 +++ conf-9.12020-06-24 07:30:35.748476384 +0200 @@ -129,10 +129,8 @@ #

Re: [VOTE] Apache NuttX 9.1.0 (incubating) RC0 release

+1, I checked - Signature and hash OK - LICENSE, DISCLAIMER and NOTICE exist - Build from source.Spresense board On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 3:17 AM Gregory Nutt wrote: > On 6/23/2020 6:59 PM, Gregory Nutt wrote: > > > >> I compared it to release 9.0 and noticed it increased about 3 KiB of > >>

Jenkins build is back to normal : NuttX-Nightly-Build #200

See

Re: [VOTE] Apache NuttX 9.1.0 (incubating) RC0 release

On 6/23/2020 6:59 PM, Gregory Nutt wrote: I compared it to release 9.0 and noticed it increased about 3 KiB of Flash usage, but I didn't check further to see what happened. NuttX 9.0 $ arm-none-eabi-size nuttx     text   data    bss    dec    hex    filename    68624   

Re: [VOTE] Apache NuttX 9.1.0 (incubating) RC0 release

I compared it to release 9.0 and noticed it increased about 3 KiB of Flash usage, but I didn't check further to see what happened. NuttX 9.0 $ arm-none-eabi-size nuttx text data bss dec hex filename 686241042496 71224 11638 nuttx NuttShell

Re: [VOTE] Apache NuttX 9.1.0 (incubating) RC0 release

Hi, > This key is not expired and has been signed by my apache.org email address as > well Thanks for that I must of had an old cached key. Setting your expiry dates to the near future may not be a good idea as I seem to recall releases with expired key were removed from the mirrors at one

Re: [VOTE] Apache NuttX 9.1.0 (incubating) RC0 release

On Tue, Jun 23, 2020 at 5:36 PM Brennan Ashton wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 23, 2020 at 5:35 PM Brennan Ashton > wrote: > > > > On Tue, Jun 23, 2020 at 5:31 PM Justin Mclean > > wrote: > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > I’ve not done a full check (which I will do) but I would be -1 on this > > > release

Re: [VOTE] Apache NuttX 9.1.0 (incubating) RC0 release

On Tue, Jun 23, 2020 at 5:35 PM Brennan Ashton wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 23, 2020 at 5:31 PM Justin Mclean > wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > I’ve not done a full check (which I will do) but I would be -1 on this > > release as it looks like it’s been signed with an expired key: > > > > gpg: Good

Re: [VOTE] Apache NuttX 9.1.0 (incubating) RC0 release

On Tue, Jun 23, 2020 at 5:31 PM Justin Mclean wrote: > > Hi, > > I’ve not done a full check (which I will do) but I would be -1 on this > release as it looks like it’s been signed with an expired key: > > gpg: Good signature from "Brennan Ashton " > [expired] > gpg: Note: This key has expired!

Re: [VOTE] Apache NuttX 9.1.0 (incubating) RC0 release

Hi, I’ve not done a full check (which I will do) but I would be -1 on this release as it looks like it’s been signed with an expired key: gpg: Good signature from "Brennan Ashton " [expired] gpg: Note: This key has expired! It's also a good idea to sign with an “@apache.org” email address.

Re: [VOTE] Apache NuttX 9.1.0 (incubating) RC0 release

Hi, > Does this mean that if you do not validate anything, you lose your right as a > PPMC member to vote? No, merit once gained isn’t lost, but it could be a little embarrassing if a critical issue is found after the release has been made. In that case another release is needed to correct

Re: [VOTE] Apache NuttX 9.1.0 (incubating) RC0 release

Hi Brennan, I did a basic test on STM32F4Discovery board compiling the "nsh" and everything worked fine (see below). My VOTE: +1 I compared it to release 9.0 and noticed it increased about 3 KiB of Flash usage, but I didn't check further to see what happened. NuttX 9.0 $ arm-none-eabi-size

Re: [VOTE] Apache NuttX 9.1.0 (incubating) RC0 release

> > In the past, I thought we decided that any [VOTE] phase must be preceded > by a [DISCUSS] phase? > This email is basically boiler plate that is following the process that Apache defines for the podling release process and is the same as what we did for the last release. There is no obligation

Re: [VOTE] Apache NuttX 9.1.0 (incubating) RC0 release

On 6/23/2020 12:36 AM, Brennan Ashton wrote: Hello all, Apache NuttX (Incubating) 9.1.0 has been staged under [1] and it's time to vote on accepting it for release. If approved we will seek final release approval from the IPMC. Voting will be open for 72hr. Because this project targets embedded

Re: [VOTE] Apache NuttX 9.1.0 (incubating) RC0 release

On 6/23/2020 12:36 AM, Brennan Ashton wrote: Hello all, Apache NuttX (Incubating) 9.1.0 has been staged under [1] and it's time to vote on accepting it for release. If approved we will seek final release approval from the IPMC. Voting will be open for 72hr. Because this project targets embedded

Re: ftw/fts

The core of these functions should be the same as the logic in apps/insulin in cmd_ls() that handles the 'lsd _R' command. Of course, I meant 'ls -R'.  I don't know what I was on. I am referring specifically to the function nsh_foreach_direntry() which is actually in nsh_fsutils.c.  It

Re: ftw/fts

The core of these functions should be the same as the logic in apps/insulin in cmd_ls() that handles the 'lsd _R' command. Of course, I meant 'ls -R'.  I don't know what I was on. I am referring specifically to the function nsh_foreach_direntry() which is actually in nsh_fsutils.c.  It is

Re: ftw/fts

The core of these functions should be the same as the logic in apps/insulin in cmd_ls() that handles the 'lsd _R' command.Sent from Samsung tablet. Original message From: Alan Carvalho de Assis Date: 6/23/20 5:22 AM (GMT-06:00) To: dev@nuttx.apache.org Subject: Re: ftw/fts

Re: ftw/fts

Hi Yamamoto-san, I didn't find an implementation for NuttX, but it should be nice to have it because it is part of POSIX standard. BR, Alan On 6/23/20, Takashi Yamamoto wrote: > hi, > > does anyone know ftw/nftw, fts, or similar libraries for nuttx? >

Re: [VOTE] Apache NuttX 9.1.0 (incubating) RC0 release

Hi, +1, I checked: - Incubating in name - Signature and hash OK - LICENSE, DISCLAIMER and NOTICE exist - Build from source. On Tue, Jun 23, 2020 at 7:37 AM Brennan Ashton wrote: > > Hello all, > Apache NuttX (Incubating) 9.1.0 has been staged under [1] and it's time to > vote > on accepting it

Re: Creating 9.1.0-RC0

> Hmmm... I believe that the whole point of Release Notes is to point > out things like Compatibility Concerns that our downstream users and > developers will want to know about before they attempt to update and > learn the hard way that their code doesn't build or doesn't run > correctly. But

[VOTE] Apache NuttX 9.1.0 (incubating) RC0 release

Hello all, Apache NuttX (Incubating) 9.1.0 has been staged under [1] and it's time to vote on accepting it for release. If approved we will seek final release approval from the IPMC. Voting will be open for 72hr. Because this project targets embedded systems there is more complexity involved in