On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 10:30 PM, Duane Ellis wrote:
> All - I believe - I am not sure - that the primary benefit of
> "libft2xxx" is as follows:
>
> (a) It is measurably faster.
>
> That just requires "work" to make it faster.
>
> (b) It works on more platforms, ie: Win7, WinVista, because
> Today's OpenOCD handles both services (and more).
> If you split out "Smart JTAG", would OpenOCD be
> the split-out part ... or the target level service?
>
> I'd lean towards the latter.
My motivation for a low level JTAG over TCP/IP is that
it would enable OpenOCD maintainers to run OpenOCD
on
On Monday 22 June 2009, Rick Altherr wrote:
>
> On Jun 22, 2009, at 7:56 PM, David Brownell wrote:
>
> > I would like my mailbox to stop getting filled with "how can
> > we circumvent this software license" crap too. Just stop; if
> > the license bothers you, work to change it not circumvent it.
On Jun 22, 2009, at 7:56 PM, David Brownell wrote:
On Monday 22 June 2009, Zach Welch wrote:
So, notably absent from this list are any type of "wrapper" library.
Several contributors oppose this as an option, particularly as these
suggestions appear to derive exclusively from the present desi
On Monday 22 June 2009, Zach Welch wrote:
> > yea, truthfully - compliance with this is all over the map... it does
> > vary quite a bit.
>
> Yup, but these patches will bring almost all operator whitespace issues
> into compliance; only a handful of operators will remain to fix later.
And there
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 10:37 AM, David Brownell wrote:
> On Sunday 21 June 2009, Xiaofan Chen wrote:
>> > As an aside, has anyone had the opportunity to try OpenOCD with an
>> > FT2232H-based dongle? I believe high-speed USB should almost eliminate
>> > latency effects due to going from 1 ms-based
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 11:00 AM, David Brownell wrote:
> On Monday 22 June 2009, Duane Ellis wrote:
>> (d) There is another choice - "WinUSB"
>>
>> http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa476426.aspx
>>
>> As I understand, it is a a multi-(windoze)-platform solution that
>> exposes the USB
On Mon, 2009-06-22 at 21:24 -0400, Duane Ellis wrote:
> Zach Welch wrote:
> > There have been no objections to these series of patches, so I intend to
> > regenerate and apply them soon.
> >
> There is one thing I do not like - not exactly what you are talking
> about here.. I'd rather my voice
On Monday 22 June 2009, Duane Ellis wrote:
> (d) There is another choice - "WinUSB"
>
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa476426.aspx
>
> As I understand, it is a a multi-(windoze)-platform solution that
> exposes the USB device, functionally in the same manor and style as
> "libus
On Monday 22 June 2009, Zach Welch wrote:
> So, notably absent from this list are any type of "wrapper" library.
> Several contributors oppose this as an option, particularly as these
> suggestions appear to derive exclusively from the present desire to
> circumvent the GPL distribution restriction
On Monday 22 June 2009, Zach Welch wrote:
> Actually, I see no reason that it cannot be GPL too. ...
>
> Either way, I would consider adding it to the
> repository in the tools/ directory, if that turns out to be a reasonable
> plan of action for all. What do you think about that?
One c
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 10:45 AM, Alain Mouette wrote:
>
> Xiaofan Chen escreveu:
>>
>> Can you use usb serial port if you use Linux? If not, maybe the
>> FTDI driver has some extra ways to make the com port.
>
> Yes, it works great :)
>
> there is only a small glitch that when you restart OpenOCD,
On Monday 22 June 2009, Harald Kipp wrote:
> We either need a written GPL exception explicitly granted by all
> contributors
As I pointed out when I raised the issue. In fact I even
went and provided a list of 50 developers who would need to
be agreeing to add such an exception.
> or a clear s
On Sunday 21 June 2009, Xiaofan Chen wrote:
> > As an aside, has anyone had the opportunity to try OpenOCD with an
> > FT2232H-based dongle? I believe high-speed USB should almost eliminate
> > latency effects due to going from 1 ms-based frames to 125 us-based
> > microframes.
> >
>
> Not sure he
On Monday 22 June 2009, Zach Welch wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-06-22 at 19:59 +0200, Dominic wrote:
> >
> > Øyvind mentioned the idea of wrapping the JTAG API in TCP/IP. Aside
> > from performance implications I think this would require some
> > significant development efforts with little immediate benef
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 6:01 AM, Duane Ellis wrote:
> Freddie,
>
> I want to understand what you are working on.
>
> I believe there are 3 or 4 things needed to make OpenOCD work with a
> "universal inf file" for LibUSB really work.
>
> I think of it this way:
>
> (a) We have a simple "text file"
On Monday 22 June 2009, Øyvind Harboe wrote:
> My favourite is to introduce a serialized protocol for JTAG that
> can work over TCP/IP, pipes, even fn calls...
Such a thing would be useful for a more functional USB
interface to JTAG adapters. Consider some microcontroller
using a (high speed!) US
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 3:30 AM, Duane Ellis wrote:
> All - I believe - I am not sure - that the primary benefit of
> "libft2xxx" is as follows:
>
> (a) It is measurably faster.
>
> That just requires "work" to make it faster.
>
> (b) It works on more platforms, ie: Win7, WinVista, because d
Joseph Kuss wrote:
> To All,
>
> I am using openOCD 0.1.0, GDB 6.8 and Eclipse Ganymede
>
> For the Eagle100 board, using LM3S6918:
>
> I can download my program into flash ok
> I can start/continue the program,
> I just can not get breakpoints to work.
>
> Please Help. If I need to send th
On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 11:55 PM, Gene Smith wrote:
>> Have you tried the following method?
>>
>> Run cmd.exe as admin (under Vista) and
>> D:\libusb-win32-device-bin-0.1.12.1\bin>c:\windows\sys tem32\rundll32
>> libusb0.dll,usb_install_driver_np_rundll olimex.inf
>>
>
> Unfortunately, at least on
On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 11:16 PM, Gene Smith wrote:
> Xiaofan Chen wrote:
>>
>> No. By using libusb-win32 device driver as the driver for
>> the Olimex device instead of FTDI driver, you will lost the
>> serial port.
>
> Maybe I was not understanding. I think you are really saying that there
> is *
Zach Welch wrote:
> There have been no objections to these series of patches, so I intend to
> regenerate and apply them soon.
>
There is one thing I do not like - not exactly what you are talking
about here.. I'd rather my voice be heard...
In general, I think a general "white space cleanup"
On Wed, 2009-06-17 at 21:52 -0700, Zach Welch wrote:
> The following chain of patch series performs tree-wide whitespace
> clean-up, using systematic search and replacement (i.e. sed).
> It must be applied on top of the last series that changes the types.
>
> The patches in these series have been
On Tue, 2009-06-23 at 02:31 +0300, Yusuf Caglar AKYUZ wrote:
> Zach Welch wrote:
> > Actually, I see no reason that it cannot be GPL too. It's "only" a
> > build tool; it will not be linking to either OpenOCD or FTD2XX, right?
> > The full GPL would prevent others from creating proprietary version
Alain Mouette wrote:
> Yusuf Caglar AKYUZ escreveu:
>>> Out of sheer curiosity: how will your Qt wrapper be licensed? :) :)
>>>
>> Whichever license is appropriate, both for OpenOCD and FTD2XX. LGPL
>> may be?
>
> The Qt licence is strict GPL, so it cannot be anything else...
>
No, not anymore.
Yusuf Caglar AKYUZ escreveu:
>>
>> Out of sheer curiosity: how will your Qt wrapper be licensed? :) :)
>>
>
> Whichever license is appropriate, both for OpenOCD and FTD2XX. LGPL
> may be?
The Qt licence is strict GPL, so it cannot be anything else...
Alain
Hi Zach,
Zach Welch escreveu:
>
> With OpenOCD linked to the FTD2XX driver inside the image?
>
> That would be a GPL violation too.
>
> Seriously. There are no legal shortcuts here.
I understand your point of view, but my heart is split in two...
1) by enforcing the GPL you surely are ince
Michael Fischer escreveu:
>
> In this case we give the user the possibility to make a private
> build in a easy way.
That is not the case at the moment.
I sent a message in 2009jun16 called
"Compiling dificulties" because as a reasonably experienced Linux
user/programer, it took me 3 days to co
On Jun 22, 2009, at 4:16 PM, Zach Welch wrote:
Actually, I see no reason that it cannot be GPL too. It's "only" a
build tool; it will not be linking to either OpenOCD or FTD2XX, right?
The full GPL would prevent others from creating proprietary versions
of
your tool, which may or may not b
Zach Welch wrote:
> Actually, I see no reason that it cannot be GPL too. It's "only" a
> build tool; it will not be linking to either OpenOCD or FTD2XX, right?
> The full GPL would prevent others from creating proprietary versions of
> your tool, which may or may not be what you desire personally;
On Tue, 2009-06-23 at 01:50 +0300, Yusuf Caglar AKYUZ wrote:
> Zach Welch wrote:
> > On Tue, 2009-06-23 at 01:36 +0300, Yusuf Caglar AKYUZ wrote:
> >> Zach Welch wrote:
> >>> Hi all,
> >>>
> >>> I will try to summarize the OpenOCD license situation for the community:
> >>>
> >>> - OpenOCD is licens
Zach Welch wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-06-23 at 01:36 +0300, Yusuf Caglar AKYUZ wrote:
>> Zach Welch wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> I will try to summarize the OpenOCD license situation for the community:
>>>
>>> - OpenOCD is licensed under the GPL -- without exceptions.
>>> - Binaries linking to FTD2XX may
On Mon, 2009-06-22 at 14:45 -0700, David Brownell wrote:
> Move the short chapter about JIM-Tcl earlier, so that we
> can reasonably assume it's been introduced before we start
> presenting things that presume such an introduction.
> Plus a few minor typo-level fixes.
> ---
> doc/openocd.texi |
On Tue, 2009-06-23 at 01:36 +0300, Yusuf Caglar AKYUZ wrote:
> Zach Welch wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I will try to summarize the OpenOCD license situation for the community:
> >
> > - OpenOCD is licensed under the GPL -- without exceptions.
> > - Binaries linking to FTD2XX may NOT be distributed.
Zach Welch wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I will try to summarize the OpenOCD license situation for the community:
>
> - OpenOCD is licensed under the GPL -- without exceptions.
> - Binaries linking to FTD2XX may NOT be distributed.
> - Neither static nor shared, direct nor indirect.
> - There will be
Hi all,
I will try to summarize the OpenOCD license situation for the community:
- OpenOCD is licensed under the GPL -- without exceptions.
- Binaries linking to FTD2XX may NOT be distributed.
- Neither static nor shared, direct nor indirect.
- There will be no future exceptions to this rule.
Freddie,
I want to understand what you are working on.
I believe there are 3 or 4 things needed to make OpenOCD work with a
"universal inf file" for LibUSB really work.
I think of it this way:
(a) We have a simple "text file" - with 4 columns.
Column 1 - Vendor ID
Column 2 - Product ID
Colu
Move the short chapter about JIM-Tcl earlier, so that we
can reasonably assume it's been introduced before we start
presenting things that presume such an introduction.
Plus a few minor typo-level fixes.
---
doc/openocd.texi | 88 -
1 file chan
This should be my last significant update of the User's Guide for
this release. Mostly it's a rework of the config file chapter's
presentation of board and target config files.
- Give the new path for scripts!
- Move board-config material out of the target-config section
- Add more board-confi
>> Øyvind mentioned the idea of wrapping the JTAG API in TCP/IP. Aside
>> from performance implications I think this would require some
>> significant development efforts with little immediate benefits. Even
>> worse, it would encourage other JTAG interface vendors to implement
>> their JTAG interf
All - I believe - I am not sure - that the primary benefit of
"libft2xxx" is as follows:
(a) It is measurably faster.
That just requires "work" to make it faster.
(b) It works on more platforms, ie: Win7, WinVista, because drivers
exist for those platforms.
This is tough/hard, nob
On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 8:25 PM, David Brownell wrote:
> On Monday 22 June 2009, Ųyvind Harboe wrote:
>> Committed.
>
> It's wrongly using DOS-style line endings ...
Fixed.
--
Øyvind Harboe
Embedded software and hardware consulting services
http://consulting.zylin.com
__
> Øyvind mentioned the idea of wrapping the JTAG API in TCP/IP. Aside from
> performance implications I think this would require some significant
> development efforts with little immediate benefits. Even worse, it would
> encourage other JTAG interface vendors to implement their JTAG interface
> l
On Sunday 21 June 2009, Øyvind Harboe wrote:
> Committed.
It's wrongly using DOS-style line endings ...
___
Openocd-development mailing list
Openocd-development@lists.berlios.de
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/openocd-development
On Monday 22 June 2009, Øyvind Harboe wrote:
> Committed.
It's wrongly using DOS-style line endings ...
___
Openocd-development mailing list
Openocd-development@lists.berlios.de
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/openocd-development
On Mon, 2009-06-22 at 19:59 +0200, Dominic wrote:
> Hi List,
>
>
>
> there has been some speculation about my original intents so I thought
> I might chime in here.
>
>
>
> I'm all in favor of enforcing the GPL where it achieves anything for
> the user. In case of FTD2XX I decided to go the p
Hi List,
there has been some speculation about my original intents so I thought I might
chime in here.
I'm all in favor of enforcing the GPL where it achieves anything for the user.
In case of FTD2XX I decided to go the pragmatic way instead of the idealist's
way.
Why do we want to link again
Xiaofan Chen pisze:
In this case, I think you do not need the master entry. Please
try it again with the master entry deleted.
The master entry (the one without &MI00 and &MI01) is not necessary.
I attach a changed driver file.
4\/3!!
[Version]
Signature = "$Chicago$"
provider = %manufacture
On Mon, 2009-06-22 at 19:19 +0200, Harald Kipp wrote:
> Øyvind Harboe wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 5:47 PM, Michael
> > Schwingen wrote:
> >> Harald Kipp wrote:
> >>> This is easier to implement than what I suggested: Building an
> >>> intermediate LGPL'ed DLL which links OpenOCD with FTD2XX.
David Brownell wrote:
> On Monday 22 June 2009, Harald Kipp wrote:
>> 1. Someone creates a dummy FTD2XX library, published under LGPL. This
>> library does not contain any FTDI-code, just dummies which contain the
>> same entry names, but always return errors.
>
> This is a transparent attempt to
Committed.
Thanks!
--
Øyvind Harboe
Embedded software and hardware consulting services
http://consulting.zylin.com
___
Openocd-development mailing list
Openocd-development@lists.berlios.de
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/openocd-development
Committed.
Thanks!
--
Øyvind Harboe
Embedded software and hardware consulting services
http://consulting.zylin.com
___
Openocd-development mailing list
Openocd-development@lists.berlios.de
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/openocd-development
Gene Smith pisze:
> How do I add olimex-arm-usb-ocd device to this inf? And once I have
> added it, how do you install the driver so it remains permanent (i.e.,
> survives a winXP reboot)?
Just copy the entries for Turtelizer of JTAGkey and change the
description and VID/PID combinations. Add t
On Monday 22 June 2009, Harald Kipp wrote:
> 1. Someone creates a dummy FTD2XX library, published under LGPL. This
> library does not contain any FTDI-code, just dummies which contain the
> same entry names, but always return errors.
This is a transparent attempt to circumvent the GPL terms.
Among
On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 7:19 PM, Harald Kipp wrote:
> Øyvind Harboe wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 5:47 PM, Michael
>> Schwingen wrote:
>>> Harald Kipp wrote:
This is easier to implement than what I suggested: Building an
intermediate LGPL'ed DLL which links OpenOCD with FTD2XX.
>
Target config file for newish DM365 chip. Think of this as
an improved DM355, integrating much better HD video support,
Ethernet, and other goodies.
---
tcl/target/ti_dm365.cfg | 97 ++
1 file changed, 97 insertions(+)
Target config file for newish D
Øyvind Harboe wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 5:47 PM, Michael
> Schwingen wrote:
>> Harald Kipp wrote:
>>> This is easier to implement than what I suggested: Building an
>>> intermediate LGPL'ed DLL which links OpenOCD with FTD2XX.
>>>
>> I don't see how that solves the GPL problem: as soon as th
On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 7:09 PM, Michael
Schwingen wrote:
> Øyvind Harboe wrote:
>>> As far as I see the situationn, the only clean possibility (except
>>> changing the license) is to have the FTD2XX library in a separate
>>> process, not linked into openocd's address space, which means separating
Michael Fischer wrote:
> Hello List,
>
> here is the driver which was build from the SVN r161 (libusb).
> Please test it, it should work with composite devices too.
>
> The zip contains the driver for the "user". The library
> is the new one which was create by the build process.
>
> I have remo
Make the Hitex STM32-PerformanceStick board config behave better:
source the STM32 target config instead of using a private clone.
The same should evidently be done with the STR750 chip on this
board, but the str750.cfg looks like quite a mess ... I'm not
sure which board it's expecting, but it's
Øyvind Harboe wrote:
>> As far as I see the situationn, the only clean possibility (except
>> changing the license) is to have the FTD2XX library in a separate
>> process, not linked into openocd's address space, which means separating
>> the functionality and communicating by sockets or similar me
On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 5:47 PM, Michael
Schwingen wrote:
> Harald Kipp wrote:
>> This is easier to implement than what I suggested: Building an
>> intermediate LGPL'ed DLL which links OpenOCD with FTD2XX.
>>
> I don't see how that solves the GPL problem: as soon as the FTD2XX
> library is linked i
Xiaofan Chen wrote:
>
> Have you tried the following method?
>
> Run cmd.exe as admin (under Vista) and
> D:\libusb-win32-device-bin-0.1.12.1\bin>c:\windows\sys tem32\rundll32
> libusb0.dll,usb_install_driver_np_rundll olimex.inf
>
Unfortunately, at least on my XP setup, this does not survive a
Harald Kipp wrote:
> This is easier to implement than what I suggested: Building an
> intermediate LGPL'ed DLL which links OpenOCD with FTD2XX.
>
I don't see how that solves the GPL problem: as soon as the FTD2XX
library is linked into openocd, it is not OK to distribute - having an
intermedia
On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 5:32 PM, Timothy Clacy wrote:
>
> Any suggestions for getting past this bootstrap problem?
>
>
> $ ./bootstrap
> + aclocal
> + libtoolize --automake --copy
> + autoconf
> /usr/bin/m4:configure.in:432: cannot create temporary file for
> diversion: Permission denied
> autom4te
Any suggestions for getting past this bootstrap problem?
$ ./bootstrap
+ aclocal
+ libtoolize --automake --copy
+ autoconf
/usr/bin/m4:configure.in:432: cannot create temporary file for
diversion: Permission denied
autom4te-2.63: /usr/bin/m4 failed with exit status: 1
Bootstrap complete; you can
Xiaofan Chen wrote:
>
> No. By using libusb-win32 device driver as the driver for
> the Olimex device instead of FTDI driver, you will lost the
> serial port.
Maybe I was not understanding. I think you are really saying that there
is *no way* to have the serial port *and* the jtag running togeth
Orin Eman wrote:
> All someone need do is produce a DLL that is called FTD2XX and implements
> (or plans to implement) all the interfaces that OpenOCD uses and release it
> under LGPL. The interfaces can all return failure for now. There would be
> no problem whatsoever releasing a binary linked
Duane Ellis wrote:
> We as a group, perhaps may not like this fact, but it is what it is. I
> can not change that original exception, nor can anyone else. It was part
> of the deal when each of us started to contribute to OpenOCD.
Good argument against the repeated phrase "I wouldn't have contr
Zach Welch wrote:
> Thank you for taking the time to participate in this discussion.
Zach, thank you for taking the time to respond to my lengthy
explanations. I'll try to make it short now. :-)
> I think you need to get legal counsel to confirm your point; I believe
> this case is no different
2009/6/22 Nico Coesel :
> As far as I can understand the problem is that OpenOCD
> cannot be distributed as a Windows binary linked against a
> USB device driver which is non-GPL code. This makes me wonder
> how the executable is to be run on Windows. Somewhere the code
> must be linked against Mic
> -Original Message-
> From: openocd-development-boun...@lists.berlios.de [mailto:openocd-
> development-boun...@lists.berlios.de] On Behalf Of Xiaofan Chen
> Sent: maandag 22 juni 2009 1:59
> To: Zach Welch
> Cc: openocd-development@lists.berlios.de
> Subject: Re: [Openocd-development] FT2
Freddie Chopin wrote:
>
>> You are spreading FUD. Please. Stop. Now.
>>
>
> Why? You - on the other hand - are all "that violates GPL, period", so
> you're spreading "GPL-or-die". Please. Stop. Now. Any realistic solution
> is "violating the GPL" according to you, that's a pure "No, b
73 matches
Mail list logo
