From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from 6.mo2.mail-out.ovh.net ([87.98.165.38] helo=mo2.mail-out.ovh.net) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1WiNlt-0008SF-Kl for barebox@lists.infradead.org; Thu, 08 May 2014 12:49:58 +0000 Received: from mail176.ha.ovh.net (gw6.ovh.net [213.251.189.206]) by mo2.mail-out.ovh.net (Postfix) with SMTP id CA6AB10084A7 for ; Thu, 8 May 2014 14:40:23 +0200 (CEST) Date: Thu, 8 May 2014 14:43:15 +0200 From: Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD Message-ID: <20140508124315.GC15426@ns203013.ovh.net> References: <20140505145512.133932fc3ee2247b660638c2@gmail.com> <20140505122944.GA1567@mail.gnudd.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20140505122944.GA1567@mail.gnudd.com> List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "barebox" Errors-To: barebox-bounces+u.kleine-koenig=pengutronix.de@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: TODO: Rewrite network stack. To: Alessandro Rubini Cc: barebox@lists.infradead.org On 14:29 Mon 05 May , Alessandro Rubini wrote: > > > The most notable is lwIP (http://savannah.nongnu.org/projects/lwip/). > > I'm not happy at all about this code base, it looks quite ugly and > old-fashioned. It's not the barebox kind of quality. I'd stay with the > current code rather than lwip, despite the number of users. > > If any, I'd evaluate picotcp (https://github.com/tass-belgium/picotcp). uIP too Best Regards, J. > > /alessandro > > _______________________________________________ > barebox mailing list > barebox@lists.infradead.org > http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox _______________________________________________ barebox mailing list barebox@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox