On Saturday 19 September 2009, Øyvind Harboe wrote:
> - What type of hardware vendors care about OpenOCD? ("Why the
> hell would we want *another* JTAG debugger???" is what I've heard
> so far...)Longer term, having a solid Free Software competitor will affect the market in various ways. JTAG adapter vendors, and chip vendors needing JTAG support, will get used to having non-proprietary alternatives not unlike compiler vendors did. Near term, it's not yet as solid as we'd like. > - What's OpenOCD's ultimate aspiration? My personal vision is that > OpenOCD becomes an inseparable part of the GCC toolchain for > embedded work, just like GDB is. That seems like it should be very achievable; a good goal. Getting there will require more work. :) I understand that TI's Code Composer Studio v4 (CCS) switched to Eclipse ... but a not-current one (when they did that work; an updated CCS, with newer Eclipse, is on the way) in part because the GDB debug model was inadequate to the tasks they needed JTAG debugging to handle. That makes me suspect that GDB changes in that area may well be in the cards. - Dave _______________________________________________ Openocd-development mailing list Openocd-development@lists.berlios.de https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/openocd-development
