[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [avr-gcc-list] AVaRICE and gdb windows port

From: E. Weddington
Subject: Re: [avr-gcc-list] AVaRICE and gdb windows port
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 10:02:48 -0700

On 20 Feb 2003 at 17:39, David Brown wrote:

> Does anyone know if there are plans to port AVaRICE to windows? 

Vague eventual plans, yes.
> I would imagine it would be a fairly simple matter, at least under
> cygwin. 

Sometimes the difference between imagination and reality is 
astounding. :-)

> avr-gdb is probably already working under windows (I haven't
> tried it yet, since I could not get avarice to compile), given that
> there are lots of other gdb's running under windows. 

AFAIK, it isn't working under windows.

>  I would like to
> use gdb as an alternative to AVR Studio, since it provides more
> flexible debugging (watching things like structures work properly, and
> has powerful scripting) and would be consistent with my tools for
> other micros (msp430, 68332). 

Aye, there's the rub. 

You don't use AVaRICE for debugging / simulating per se. AVaRICE is 
for In Circuit Emulatation (ICE).

For debugging / simulating you want to use GDB with SimulAVR, which 
simulates an AVR device. However, AFAIK SimulAVR is not as advanced 
as AVR Studio.

To summarize:

Free debugging / simulating tools for AVR:
1. AVR Studio. Windows only. Use with GCC is buggy (currently).
2. GDB / SimulAVR. Linux only (currently). Simulator.
3. GDB / AVaRICE. Linux only (currently). Used in ICE.

I've heard that other users like VMLAB but I don't know much about 
it. But I don't think that it's a free tool. (Corrections, additions 

> But at the moment it looks like I would
> have to run avarice on a linux machine and connect to it over the
> network - it would probably work, but it's hardly convenient.

> The latest version of avarice I found on the net is around a year old
> - does this mean it is so complete that there is no need for it, or
> that development has stalled for lack of interest or lack of
> resources?

I thought I heard that it is not being developed as much as it 
should. Somebody correct me if I'm wrong.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]