Alire crate

[reznikmm]

What do you think about having ada-enet as a crate (or two crates) in Alire? Does it worth spending time?

I mean we split the code into a target independent part and stm32 dependent driver. I guess we can have a target independent crate rather easily. I can send a PR if you want. It won't break current configure scripts. By having an independent part, people will be able to write drivers for specific hardware.

Wrapping stm32 driver as a crate is harder, because it depends on STM32 packages and no crate provides these packages right now. I did an experiment with next approach:

• I've made a enet_stm32 crate that depends on "virtual" stm32 crate and has with "stm32.gpr"; clause in the project file.
• a board (in my case stm32f4xx_m) has provides = ["stm32=1.0"] in alire.toml. It provides stm32.gpr project with a copy of Ada_Drivers_Library for STM32 and STM32_SVD packages.
• an application crate uses enet, enet_stm32, stm32f4xx_m crates and configures network device as needed.

[stcarrez]

It's fine for me, and yes, it would be nice to have a crate instead of the configure stuff which was there to cope with some configuration issues.

It is not clear for me how the Ada_Drivers_Library is still usable in the Alire environment and how.

By the way, I didn't know there was such provides thing in Alire :-)

Ready to spend time with you (in my little spare time) if you want...

[reznikmm]

I've pushed PR for enet 1.0.0 to alire index:

alire-project/alire-index#1120

It points to commit 5441088

[reznikmm]

The PR was merged!

Also I would like to note that I have got

• a prototype for enet driver implemented on top of Linux TUN/TAP - https://github.com/reznikmm/enet_tap/ To simplify debugging.
• a prototype for TFTP - https://github.com/reznikmm/tftp

I think they will be separated crates.