[INFO] lwIP version 2.0 Topic is solved

[Giovanni]

Merged the two threads.

Giovanni

[Giovanni]

Any news on this front?

I hope to have a full release sometime in February.

Giovanni

[Marco]

Hi Giovanni,

I have been quite busy last weeks (and still) so i didn't continue my work on this. I will make sure all the work so far is in the git repository. If i remember correct i started working on a PPPoE netif but didn't know how to continue.

For this upcoming release a working Ethernet and PPPoS driver should be feasible IMO. I'll try to clean it a bit so you can include it in the release.

Marco

[steved]

I've updated the lwIP bindings to work with lwIP V2.0.2.
This also incorporates iggarpe's buffer patch (and a file without it)
Basic testing with the web server is fine

Using the 17.6.0 release

[Giovanni]

Thanks, I will try to integrate before next release.

Giovanni

[steved]

As an addendum, I'm sure I've seen a post on this (duplicate definition of struct timeval), but can't find it. From lwip's sockets.h:

Code: Select all

/** LWIP_TIMEVAL_PRIVATE: if you want to use the struct timeval provided
 * by your system, set this to 0 and include <sys/time.h> in cc.h */

(Applies to both 1.4 and 2.0)
My inclination would be to set LWIP_TIMEVAL_PRIVATE to zero and do the include in Chibi's cc.h; in an ideal world I can see no need to override a standard definition. However the non-GCC world may be less than ideal; might this need to be a project-configurable option?

[Giovanni]

Hi,

At very least there could be an #ifndef around the definition so it can be set in prjects options.

Giovanni

[steved]

At very least there could be an #ifndef around the definition so it can be set in prjects options.

Works better than expected - looks like the include order gets the message through OK (which I didn't expect on a cursory glance).

[steved]

I've updated the bindings to address bug #729 - all works fine on a quick check (although also worked fine before).
Bug #824 was addressed in the previous upload.

[Giovanni]

Do demos require adjustments after implementing this change?

Giovanni