On 7/6/07, Joerg Wunsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
...
Well, now that you've filed your patch, I'll see to get that into the
tree as well, of course before rolling a new release.
My patch still needs some investigation and testing. It did fix for me
the case of verifying (that is, reading) flas
As Shaun Jackman wrote:
> >I just committed the required modifications for both, AVRDUDE and
> >AVaRICE.
> Any plans to release a version of AVaRICE that supports the
> AT90PWM3B?
I'm still not really confident with the soft BP code in
AVaRICE-current. I've got one ATmega1280 completely damaged
On 2/26/07, Joerg Wunsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
"Shaun Jackman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The AT90PWM2B has a different signature than AT90PWM2, but avrdude
> 5.3.1 doesn't seem to support the AT90PWM2B. What is the difference
> between the AT90PWM2 and the AT90PWM2B?
...
I just committ
On 2/26/07, Joerg Wunsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
"Shaun Jackman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The AT90PWM2B has a different signature than AT90PWM2, but avrdude
> 5.3.1 doesn't seem to support the AT90PWM2B. What is the difference
> between the AT90PWM2 and the AT90PWM2B?
I think there's a m
"Shaun Jackman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The AT90PWM2B has a different signature than AT90PWM2, but avrdude
> 5.3.1 doesn't seem to support the AT90PWM2B. What is the difference
> between the AT90PWM2 and the AT90PWM2B?
I think there's a migration document from Atmel. I just tried to
review
The AT90PWM2B has a different signature than AT90PWM2, but avrdude
5.3.1 doesn't seem to support the AT90PWM2B. What is the difference
between the AT90PWM2 and the AT90PWM2B? I haven't been able to find
the answer in the data sheet. In any case, I used the entry for the
AT90PWM2 in avrdude.conf an
