Freddie Chopin wrote: > On 2010-11-12 18:27, Peter Stuge wrote: >> David Brownell wrote: >>> As for boards or JTAG adapters without nSRST, >>> no imagination is required; I have production >>> boards of both flavors. > > Show my an example of any _normal_ JTAG interface that does not have > srst?
I'm sure there are many stupid interfaces like that. We should still be able to use them as well as possible with their limited capabilities.. > As for the second case, OpenOCD's main purpose is debugging, not > programming, so production boards are not very interesting here. I disagree there, since openocd can easily be automated and customized I think it is also useful for programming. (E.g. the NXP+FPGA chain from just a few days ago.) But it doesn't change our problem; we need a data model that allows a meaningful decision tree in openocd. Limitations of one board or interface should not affect another with more capabilities. //Peter _______________________________________________ Openocd-development mailing list Openocd-development@lists.berlios.de https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/openocd-development
