Oleg V. Kobrin wrote: > I did not see any bugs in the patch. And there are a bug in gdbproxy > disallowing using of modern msp430f2x2x controllers. refer to a thread > about it in this maillist. back to the patch I do not know any bugs in it, > because it's very simple, just adding unsupported msp's in toolchain.
This has been a misunderstanding. And now I know where it comes from. Thing is that I had an old binutils-14x1-20x1-20x2-20x3-22x4-42x-42x0-461x.patch that had a bug in the linker scripts generation and used e.g. machine architecture id 200 for x20xx which was wrong and lead to the error message: "msp430-ld: cannot represent machine `msp:220'" > It > does not support any of msp430x extensions (opcodes and addressing), > because it's not subject to patch, it's just a slitely different > architecture. hovether, the person named Oscar here in this maillist, is > working on msp430x support for whole toolchain. Oh glad to know. I'd like to hear about Oscar progress. > > anyway, the maintainer of the project exist here, his name is Steven, as i > remeber. > I thought they were Chris Liechti and Dmitry Diky. Thanks. -- Raúl Sánchez Siles
