[Top][All Lists]

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

RE: [avr-gcc-list] crosstool-NG

From: Weddington, Eric
Subject: RE: [avr-gcc-list] crosstool-NG
Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2011 10:06:57 -0700

> -----Original Message-----
> From: address@hidden
> [mailto:address@hidden On
> Behalf Of Bernard Fouché
> Sent: Friday, March 04, 2011 9:52 AM
> To: address@hidden
> Subject: Re: [avr-gcc-list] crosstool-NG
> WinAVR included all patches included in the compiled binaries. AS does
> not, there is not even a link to where one can get the source code of
> the avr-gcc toolchain used (I just looked at the HELP menubar in AS5,
> just found http://www.gnu.org/software/binutils/ and nothing else).
> There is also no list of the patches used to make the toolchain and no
> version number, one has to use '--version' on each tool to discover what
> version was used to make the binaries.
> One can find also http://distribute.atmel.no/tools/opensource/ posted on
> AvrFreaks, but there is no clue if these files were used for AS5 and
> probably that's not the case because AS5 is delivered with avr-gcc 4.5.1
> while only version 4.4.3 source is made available on Atmel's site. I'm
> no software licence expert but I have the feeling that Atmel forgot
> something regarding the source code of the toolchain of AS5. Or maybe
> the information is buried somewhere else on Atmel's site ?

I have informed the development team of this issue repeatedly, before any of 
these releases have come out...

> Making all of our AVR code on Linux, I used to download WinAVR to
> rebuild a toolchain on Linux, knowing the result would work. Now the
> only solution is to go for Bingo600's scripts... I wonder how Joe
> NewAvrProgrammer can build his own correct toolchain in a reasonable
> amount of time with the information regarding the toolchain being
> scattered all around. Why Atmel doesn't publish a single web page
> listing the tools version and giving access to necessary patches (or
> making Bingo600 script 'official' or at least pointing to it) is a
> mystery for me.

I have my own opinions as to why this is the case, but I'm probably not at 
liberty to express them publicly.

> In our case the avr-gcc tools are parts of a larger code production
> chain which is based on PHP, and this does not fit in a IDE like VS. For
> instance PHP will generate .h files that are compiled on the fly with .c
> files, PHP scripts will also generate .xml files describing the target
> being compiled since those files are requested by third party programs,
> we generate also Latex code at compile time so we are sure that parts of
> the documentation are fully synchronous with the compiled target, etc.:
> Linux is fine for this. And our Linux IDE is Emacs...

Sounds like an interesting project! :-) Can you tell me more about how this is 
being used? Is it web-based AVR application building?


reply via email to

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