On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 6:10 PM, David Brownell <davi...@pacbell.net> wrote: > On Tuesday 12 May 2009, Ųyvind Harboe wrote: >> I think we should be extremely careful about defining public interfaces. > > "Defining" is less of an issue than "committing to"... :) > > >> Especially since the JTAG API still (yes still! the hard bits are done >> though) needs work & cleanup. > > Again I'll mention "liburjtag" ... it's perhaps worth > considering whether there are things to cooperate on > (JTAG structures and constants?), and where to focus on > differentiation (testing apps vs debug/devel support?). > > I don't know that liburjag is much further along than > libopenocd. But I see that it's in the works.
Could we make an interface driver in OpenOCD that would be able to use the urjtag device layer? -- 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
