Hi Alan, Thanks for sharing this. Indeed, I haven't been aware of such a tool. I'll try it out.
BR, Erdem Alan Carvalho de Assis <acas...@gmail.com>, 14 Haz 2020 Paz, 21:56 tarihinde şunu yazdı: > Hi Erdem, > > Right, I understood your idea! > > In fact Maciej already created it, see: > > https://hackaday.io/project/94372-upm-nuttx-project-manager > > https://gitlab.com/w8jcik/upm > > Did you try it? > > BR, > > Alan > > On 6/14/20, Erdem MEYDANLI <emeyda...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Alan, > > > > > > You are right. NuttX has a more comprehensive scope. For sure, what I > > proposed requires a lot of work. > > > > > > With or without OpenOCD, what I meant by SDK was a combination of > (actively > > maintained) buildroot and a meta-tool like *West *in Zephyr. > > > > > > Those who haven't heard of Zephyr's meta-tool might want to look at this: > > https://docs.zephyrproject.org/latest/guides/west/build-flash-debug.html > > > > > > I assume that the 'SDK' solves all dependency issues, and the meta-tool > > offers the functionality below: > > > > > > nxtool flash > > > > nxtool debug > > > > nxtool monitor (imagine this initiates @Greg's idea as part of its > > functionality.) > > > > > > People who are already familiar with RTOSes and MCU development > undoubtedly > > follow the current installation steps quickly. Maybe they already > > established a mini-automation for their development process. However, > when > > it comes to beginners, the installation can still be a pain in the neck. > > > > > > So, this discussion is about the unborn NXView, and I don't want to > ramble > > on about it. I find the NXView idea very beneficial. And referring to > > Greg's paragraph below, having a meta-tool that I try to explain above > > might add significant value as well. > > > >>>>>>> > > I believe that such a tool would be a valuable addition to the NuttX > > ecology. I think that such a tool would move NuttX from a basic, > > primitive open source OS project and into full competition with > > commercial products (in terms of features and usage... we are not > > actually in competition with anyone). > > <<<<<< > > > > > > Alan Carvalho de Assis <acas...@gmail.com>, 14 Haz 2020 Paz, 18:51 > > tarihinde şunu yazdı: > > > >> Hi Erdem, > >> > >> On 6/14/20, Erdem MEYDANLI <emeyda...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> sic > >> > > >> > I do agree. That would be such an invaluable tool. BTW, speaking of > >> > particular hardware like FT245 gives me an idea. Well, this might > sound > >> > a > >> > little bit irrelevant, but what about taking it a step further and > >> > developing a mini-SDK (NX-SDK) as the one Zephyr has? Still not as a > >> > very > >> > active contributor, but an enthusiastic follower of the NuttX project, > >> > I > >> > think that the entry barrier of the project is still not that low. > >> > Onboarding takes some time. Having a custom SDK that includes not only > >> > a > >> > tracer, but also other helper tools (e.g., flasher/debugger for the > >> > supported boards) would facilitate the adaptation process of the > >> newcomers. > >> > Finally, rather than relying on some particular ICs, would it be more > >> > practical to build such a tool by creating a (custom) fork of OpenOCD? > >> > > >> > >> In the past NuttX used to have a Buildroot that was able to generate > >> the toolchain, etc. It is still around, some time ago David Alessio > >> fixed it. > >> > >> At first place the SDK idea appears good, but there are many issues. > >> > >> We have many architectures, we support MCU/CPU from 8 to 64-bit > >> (Zephyr and others are 32-bit only and mainly ARM, RISC-V and Xtensa). > >> I could go on citing other issues... > >> > >> Currently at least on Linux (Debian, Ubuntu, ...) and Ubuntu Shell on > >> Windows it is very easy, just some apt/apt-get away. Even the > >> kfrontend is already there, you don't need to compile it anymore. I > >> think the main issue is that OpenOCD version is too old. But creating > >> a fork of OpenOCD is not a good idea. > >> > >> OpenOCD is a project that deserves more attention, it is like the SSH, > >> many people/companies uses it and people only not it was a "backbone" > >> when it broke. > >> The last OpenOCD release was 3 years ago and I don't see any move to a > >> new release. If they release a new version now, maybe it will delay > >> about 2 years to get it officially on Linux distros. > >> > >> I heard that OpenOCD was going to be part of Linux Foundation, but > >> nothing happened yet. Let see! > >> > >> BR, > >> > >> Alan > >> > > >
