From owner-acpi-jp@jp.FreeBSD.org Wed Jul 30 02:56:29 2003
Received: (from daemon@localhost)
	by castle.jp.FreeBSD.org (8.11.6p2+3.4W/8.11.3) id h6THuT355205;
	Wed, 30 Jul 2003 02:56:29 +0900 (JST)
	(envelope-from owner-acpi-jp@jp.FreeBSD.org)
Received: from rootlabs.com (root.org [67.118.192.226])
	by castle.jp.FreeBSD.org (8.11.6p2+3.4W/8.11.3) with SMTP/inet id h6THuRT55200
	for <acpi-jp@jp.FreeBSD.org>; Wed, 30 Jul 2003 02:56:28 +0900 (JST)
	(envelope-from nate@rootlabs.com)
Received: (qmail 55477 invoked by uid 1000); 29 Jul 2003 17:56:19 -0000
From: Nate Lawson <nate@root.org>
To: Takanori Watanabe <takawata@init-main.com>
cc: acpi-jp@jp.FreeBSD.org
In-Reply-To: <200307291508.h6TF89wW034955@sana.init-main.com>
Message-ID: <20030729104923.X55424@root.org>
References: <200307291508.h6TF89wW034955@sana.init-main.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Reply-To: acpi-jp@jp.FreeBSD.org
Precedence: list
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2003 10:56:19 -0700
X-Sequence: acpi-jp 2522
Subject: [acpi-jp 2522] Re: Importing acpicatools
Sender: owner-acpi-jp@jp.FreeBSD.org
X-Originator: nate@root.org
X-Distribute: distribute version 2.1 (Alpha) patchlevel 24e+030702

On Wed, 30 Jul 2003, Takanori Watanabe wrote:
> In message <20030729131654.GM702@laptop.6bone.nl>, Mark Santcroos wrote:
> >> > 4. Remove usr.sbin/acpi/amldb
> >> >
> >> > Comments on this approach?  At the end, acpicatools port would no longer
> >> > be needed but it could still be useful to provide amldb support.
> >
> >Was this a license issue or just code issue? (I forgot, if I ever knew)
>
> Because Mike Smith opposed to.
> http://home.jp.freebsd.org/cgi-bin/showmail/acpi-jp/998

That doesn't seem like strong opposition from him.  The acpi tools are
under the same license as acpica (the portions by Iwasaki-san are even
better: BSD license).  Also, they have improved a lot since Dec. 2000 when
he wrote that message.  Especially iasl is better than our acpidump.

The only reason why I'd remove amldb is that there is no need to have 2
debuggers and it is already included in Iwasaki-san's port.  He can
continue to maintain it if he wishes.

> Another problem is how should we import it.
> In short, "Should we have two copies of ACPICA in
> a src tree."
> Now we break ACPICA source into flat structure when importing it.
> Importing ACPICA can be done in following 4 way.
>
> 1.Break all of the source into the same directory,
>  including compiler stuff, and usr.sbin/acpi directory contains only
>  frontend stuff.
>
> 2. Import most of ACPICA source into sys/contrib, as we now do
> and import compiler stuff into contrib/acpica
>
> 3. Import all the source in original form at sys/contrib/acpica
>
> 4. Import all the source in  original form contrib/acpica
> and  breaked version in /sys/contrib/acpica.

There is no need to have two copies of ACPICA.  I planned on doing 1.
One reason for this is that we already place all the debugger files in
sys/contrib/dev/acpica so adding the compiler files is not a big deal.
However, I also see the benefit in creating contrib/acpica for the
compiler files since they are not shared with the kernel.  The debugger
files are shared with the kernel.  Actually, are all the db* and dm* files
used by the kernel?  Could some be moved to contrib/acpica?

-Nate
