Thanks for your reply, Greg. I have a follow-up question and a comment:
On 11/28/2011 06:12 AM, Greg Watson wrote:
On Nov 22, 2011, at 8:02 PM, Corey Ashford wrote:
On 11/21/2011 01:56 PM, Greg Watson wrote:
On Nov 21, 2011, at 4:15 PM, Corey Ashford wrote:
On 10/17/2011 05:52 AM, Greg W
On Nov 22, 2011, at 8:02 PM, Corey Ashford wrote:
> On 11/21/2011 01:56 PM, Greg Watson wrote:
>>
>> On Nov 21, 2011, at 4:15 PM, Corey Ashford wrote:
>>
>>> On 10/17/2011 05:52 AM, Greg Watson wrote:
> It's not clear to me why the PTP/RDT developers chose to use a separate
> project t
On 11/21/2011 01:56 PM, Greg Watson wrote:
>
> On Nov 21, 2011, at 4:15 PM, Corey Ashford wrote:
>
>> On 10/17/2011 05:52 AM, Greg Watson wrote:
It's not clear to me why the PTP/RDT developers chose to use a separate
project type "Remote C/C++ project" and introducing a different mecha
On Nov 21, 2011, at 4:15 PM, Corey Ashford wrote:
> On 10/17/2011 05:52 AM, Greg Watson wrote:
>>> It's not clear to me why the PTP/RDT developers chose to use a separate
>>> project type "Remote C/C++ project" and introducing a different mechanism
>>> for choosing toolchains, instead of reusin
On 10/17/2011 05:52 AM, Greg Watson wrote:
>> It's not clear to me why the PTP/RDT developers chose to use a separate
>> project type "Remote C/C++ project" and introducing a different mechanism
>> for choosing toolchains, instead of reusing the C/C++ project type. Maybe
>> Greg Watson can fill
On 11/01/2011 05:27 PM, Zhang, Jessica wrote:
Hi Corey,
I've lost track on this email thread but your work is definitely something we
(Yocto Project) can benefit from and we're based on RSE for remote connection.
So want to see any progress on your work as far as get it into the LinuxTools
p
Hi Corey,
I've lost track on this email thread but your work is definitely something we
(Yocto Project) can benefit from and we're based on RSE for remote connection.
So want to see any progress on your work as far as get it into the LinuxTools
project or is there a way that I can access what
On Oct 14, 2011, at 9:02 PM, Corey Ashford wrote:
>
>> If RDT already has a Makefile builder and scanner discovery etc..,
>
> It doesn't have a Makefile builder (yet), but it does have scanner discovery.
As far as I know there is are remote builders for both managed and unmanaged
projects tha
On 10/14/2011 02:01 PM, Jeff Johnston wrote:
I created a new C project (not Remote C/C++ project, because that
doesn't have any autotools toolchains I can select) and selected
the GNU
Autotools Toolchain.
I selected Remote Tools as the filesystem provider, and a valid
remote
directory and co
I created a new C project (not Remote C/C++ project, because that
doesn't have any autotools toolchains I can select) and selected
the GNU
Autotools Toolchain.
I selected Remote Tools as the filesystem provider, and a valid remote
directory and connection. It created all of the files for the
On 10/13/2011 09:29 PM, Corey Ashford wrote:
On 10/13/2011 12:25 PM, Jeff Johnston wrote:
On 10/13/2011 02:15 PM, Jeff Johnston wrote:
On 10/12/2011 09:29 PM, Corey Ashford wrote:
On 10/12/2011 05:56 PM, Corey Ashford wrote:
On 10/11/2011 12:48 PM, Jeff Johnston wrote:
Just to let people kno
On 10/13/2011 12:25 PM, Jeff Johnston wrote:
> On 10/13/2011 02:15 PM, Jeff Johnston wrote:
>> On 10/12/2011 09:29 PM, Corey Ashford wrote:
>>> On 10/12/2011 05:56 PM, Corey Ashford wrote:
On 10/11/2011 12:48 PM, Jeff Johnston wrote:
> Just to let people know that I have updated the RDT br
On 10/13/2011 02:15 PM, Jeff Johnston wrote:
On 10/12/2011 09:29 PM, Corey Ashford wrote:
On 10/12/2011 05:56 PM, Corey Ashford wrote:
On 10/11/2011 12:48 PM, Jeff Johnston wrote:
Just to let people know that I have updated the RDT branch with the
extension and plug-in necessary to allow RDT t
On 10/12/2011 09:29 PM, Corey Ashford wrote:
On 10/12/2011 05:56 PM, Corey Ashford wrote:
On 10/11/2011 12:48 PM, Jeff Johnston wrote:
Just to let people know that I have updated the RDT branch with the
extension and plug-in necessary to allow RDT to be optionally connected
with Autotools.
The
* Corey Ashford [2011-10-12 20:56]:
> [compilation error]
> I'm using the IBM Java compiler, so maybe the OpenJDK
> doesn't complain about this?
If you're using Eclipse it shouldn't matter as it'll just use JDT's
built-in compiler.
Andrew
___
linuxtool
On 10/12/2011 05:56 PM, Corey Ashford wrote:
> On 10/11/2011 12:48 PM, Jeff Johnston wrote:
>> Just to let people know that I have updated the RDT branch with the
>> extension and plug-in necessary to allow RDT to be optionally connected
>> with Autotools.
>>
>> The extension lists the nature id it
On 10/11/2011 12:48 PM, Jeff Johnston wrote:
> Just to let people know that I have updated the RDT branch with the
> extension and plug-in necessary to allow RDT to be optionally connected
> with Autotools.
>
> The extension lists the nature id it supports so in theory, we could
> support alternat
On 10/11/2011 03:00 PM, Jeff Johnston wrote:
> On 10/11/2011 05:03 PM, Corey Ashford wrote:
>> On 10/11/2011 12:48 PM, Jeff Johnston wrote:
>>> On 09/07/2011 05:21 PM, Jeff Johnston wrote:
Hi Wainer,
No estimated date on the prototype. I have it currently in a private
git
b
On 10/11/2011 05:03 PM, Corey Ashford wrote:
On 10/11/2011 12:48 PM, Jeff Johnston wrote:
On 09/07/2011 05:21 PM, Jeff Johnston wrote:
Hi Wainer,
No estimated date on the prototype. I have it currently in a private git
branch. I have done the first part which was to indirectly reference
files
On 10/11/2011 12:48 PM, Jeff Johnston wrote:
> On 09/07/2011 05:21 PM, Jeff Johnston wrote:
>> Hi Wainer,
>>
>> No estimated date on the prototype. I have it currently in a private git
>> branch. I have done the first part which was to indirectly reference
>> files and launching via a proxy. I stil
On 09/07/2011 05:21 PM, Jeff Johnston wrote:
Hi Wainer,
No estimated date on the prototype. I have it currently in a private git
branch. I have done the first part which was to indirectly reference
files and launching via a proxy. I still need to create the extension
and plug-in part so that RDT
Hi Wainer,
No estimated date on the prototype. I have it currently in a private
git branch. I have done the first part which was to indirectly
reference files and launching via a proxy. I still need to create the
extension and plug-in part so that RDT can be connected optionally.
I am als
Hi Jeff,
Do you have an estimated date for your remote Autotools first
release/prototype?
Does your design proposed necessarily implies on cross-compiling of
remote projects?
- Wainer
On 08/31/2011 03:09 PM, Jeff Johnston wrote:
Hi Corey,
I am currently working on a File and Launch proxy
On 08/31/2011 02:40 PM, Jeff Johnston wrote:
> I personally didn't realize there was a Fedora package for eclipse-ptp.
> It is not in RHEL though. From our perspective, we would have to add
> something to RHEL (since Autotools is currently in RHEL). That involves
> QA work for a new package and
I personally didn't realize there was a Fedora package for eclipse-ptp.
It is not in RHEL though. From our perspective, we would have to add
something to RHEL (since Autotools is currently in RHEL). That involves
QA work for a new package and we have to sign up for multiple years of
service
Yes, but a feature just lists the plugins and dependencies. Presumably you're
already including CDT plugins so adding a few from PTP should be trivial. I
believe there is already a PTP package for Fedora in any case.
Greg
On Aug 31, 2011, at 4:47 PM, Andrew Overholt wrote:
>> How is that any d
* Greg Watson [2011-08-31 16:49]:
> Oh, and if people are installing linuxtools from the Indigo update
> site, you wouldn't even need to do that. The PTP plugins would be
> installed automatically.
I know. This is what I was trying to point out: the difference in
consumer situations between p2
How is that any different from building and shipping linuxtools? Presumably
you'd just need to modify your build script to include a couple more plugins.
Greg
On Aug 31, 2011, at 4:10 PM, Andrew Overholt wrote:
> Hi,
>
>> The base plugins provide a set of APIs and a local implementation.
>> Th
Oh, and if people are installing linuxtools from the Indigo update site, you
wouldn't even need to do that. The PTP plugins would be installed automatically.
Greg
On Aug 31, 2011, at 4:10 PM, Andrew Overholt wrote:
> Hi,
>
>> The base plugins provide a set of APIs and a local implementation.
>
> How is that any different from building and shipping linuxtools?
Each feature is built and shipped as a separate SRPM and one or more
RPMs.
Andrew
___
linuxtools-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/linu
Hi,
> The base plugins provide a set of APIs and a local implementation.
> There is an extension point for adding new service providers. The only
> dependencies are on the platform and CDT (for the spawner).
Speaking with my consumer hat on (Fedora/RHEL), this makes more work for
us because we'd
On 08/31/2011 11:50 AM, Greg Watson wrote:
> I believe some remote capability is available, and improvements to this are
> being worked on. I can find out the status if you'd be interested.
>
Yes, I (we in the Power Linux SDK team, actually) are interested.
I was unable to get ETFw to launch a
Hi Greg,
I understand your frustration, but we want to keep things simple. For
the majority of our users who just want to run things locally, there is
no need to require PTP/RDT/RSE and whatever these drag in.
You need to understand that we maintain Linux Tools projects in Fedora
as well.
On 08/31/2011 11:38 AM, Greg Watson wrote:
> Sigh.
>
> The PTP org.eclipse.ptp.remote.* plugins are supposed to do exactly this.
> Provide a set of interfaces that work the same for local or remote. You can
> then plug in support for different remote service providers, include RSE and
> Remote
Hi Corey,
I am currently working on a File and Launch proxy for Autotools which
might help here.
The idea was that I wanted to make the Autotools plug-in RDT-able
without actually having a dependency on RDT and PTP. Thus, a future RDT
Autotools project would for the most part work the same
35 matches
Mail list logo
