Hi Gary Gary Thomas wrote:
> John Dallaway wrote: > >> Timothy M. Schaeffer wrote: >>> >>> - Why doesn't ecosconfig do what configtool does? >>> >>> - How can I make it do what configtool does? >> >> ecosconfig assumes the the current working directory is the base of the >> build tree. Try the following: >> >> $ cd /path/to/x_build >> $ ecosconfig --config=/path/to/x.ecc --prefix=/path/to/x_install > > But (and I've asked this myself for many years now) are they different > in the first place? The question has indeed been debated on many occasions. The best answer I can offer is that command line development tools tend to manipulate content with implicit reference the current working directory while graphical tools tend to be "document centric". The eCos Configuration Tool treats an eCos configuration file (*.ecc) as it's document and generates sub-directories to hold the eCos build tree and eCos install tree. This allows multiple documents to be saved in the same directory with different names. In this context, it seems sensible to save the eCos build and eCos install trees in parallel directories with names derived from the document name. The ecosconfig command-line tool assumes that the current working directory is the root of the eCos build tree and uses the same directory to hold the eCos install tree by default. This is reasonable for a command-line tool, although it becomes slightly more difficult to delete the eCos build tree while leaving the eCos install tree in place. Both tools provide an operating paradigm which is familiar to their respective users and I suspect there would anticipate considerable resistance to change. John Dallaway eCosCentric Limited -- Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://ecos.sourceware.org/fom/ecos and search the list archive: http://ecos.sourceware.org/ml/ecos-discuss
