On Sun, May 31, 2015 at 5:14 PM, Liviu Ionescu <i...@livius.net> wrote: > >> On 01 Jun 2015, at 02:44, Peter Crosthwaite <peter.crosthwa...@xilinx.com> >> wrote: >> >> ... I would stay away from Stellaris as much as possible for this >> framework type stuff as it is a legacy pre-qdev machine. > > ok > >> Alistair >> straightened out many of the mistakes in Stellaris in the STM32F work >> which is a much better template for modern code. > > yes, I noticed that, my current work is transitioning to this template. > >> I have added your git branch to my to-review queue. I'll have a look >> over next few days. > > thank you, any comments/suggestions are highly appreciated, but, again, as it > is now, it is preliminary work, only STM32-H103 and STM32F103RB were partly > updated. > > I'll let you know in a few days when a more polished version will be > available. > > > regards, > > Liviu > > > p.s. my repository also includes a relatively up-to-date copy of the official > master branch, so if you have a graphical tool (I use SourceTree on my Mac), > you can easily compare the gnuarmeclipse-dev branch with master and spot the > differences. >
So FWIW, to see a developers' changes relative to whatever fork-point they used, do this (bash): git diff $(git merge-base target-branch master) target-branch Where master is mainline and target-branch is what you are reviewing (could be a branch, SHA1 or tag etc). It will also work with difftool if you have that configured for a differ of preference (such as this SourceTree tool?). Regards, Peter > >
