On 2010-11-02 21:32, Øyvind Harboe wrote:
I think you're looking at a real problem here, but I'd be loathe to charge off in a particular direction here until we've had some time to let the idea mature and cool off.
Fine with me, but I'm affraid that this good idea may die if it will be put "on hold" for "indeterminate period of time".
I'd like any design here to be "at least 30% better" than what we have today, i.e. noticeably better to just about anybody who runs and/or maintains OpenOCD.
This would be better for me, and for the guy who was in trouble using OpenOCD with STM32F100 [;
Also, I'd like something that is pretty close to what we want long term.
You'll have to tell what you want long term then... 4\/3!! _______________________________________________ Openocd-development mailing list Openocd-development@lists.berlios.de https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/openocd-development
