>
> This sounds something like what Freddie ran into:
>
>
> https://lists.berlios.de/pipermail/openocd-development/2009-December/013817.html
>
> https://lists.berlios.de/pipermail/openocd-development/2009-December/013860.html
>
> I think this needs to be improved before 0.4 ships; it's
> rather obv
On Thursday 31 December 2009, Dean Glazeski wrote:
> Hey all,
>
> As I was testing some commands, it appears that there is an extra bit of
> output that happens when usage text is supposed to be printed.
> Specifically, it has to do with the add_usage_text command:
>
> add_usage_text [...] ]
>
>
>
> Look at my mirror. I have a few patches for that. It's post 0.4 work.
>
> --Z
>
Sweet, that's what I was talking about. I guess I'll just leave it alone
and complain how you keep doing big changes on things I'm playing with :).
I'll figure it out later.
--
// Dean Glazeski
_
On Thu, 2009-12-31 at 10:33 -0600, Dean Glazeski wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> To give some background on what I'm playing with, I'm trying to do an
> implementation for dataflash devices. This work is not looking into
> doing SPI over FT2232 or anything, I'm looking at running some native
> code on my AR
Hi all,
To give some background on what I'm playing with, I'm trying to do an
implementation for dataflash devices. This work is not looking into doing
SPI over FT2232 or anything, I'm looking at running some native code on my
ARM9 that will copy items to a dataflash device, much like the NAND dr
Hey all,
As I was testing some commands, it appears that there is an extra bit of
output that happens when usage text is supposed to be printed.
Specifically, it has to do with the add_usage_text command:
add_usage_text [...] ]
I can't find where this is happening, so I figured I would ask.
In
Hi,
in attachment patch to add interface config file for ST FlashLINK JTAG adapter.
The relevant code is already in OpenOCD.
Just FYI, I have tested OpenOCD with FlashLINK on ARM926 and works fine.
Best Regards,
Antonio Borneo
From 1e56d9afd9b591951e8de12ed98e4733fd39e8bf Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
On Thursday 31 December 2009, Antonio Borneo wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 31, 2009 at 9:01 AM, David Brownell wrote:
> > Do you have a strategy for finding these, or are you just
> > tripping over these problems? Either way is fine, but I'm
> > curious.
>
> At the beginning, just by chance.
Well please
On Thursday 31 December 2009, Michael Schwingen wrote:
> David Brownell wrote:
> > FWIW that Sparkun forum is only moderately obscure.
> > It's the one Olimex points its customers to, and we
> > mention it as a "User's Forum" in our documentation.
>
> Interesting - I did not even know about it unti
David Brownell wrote:
> FWIW that Sparkun forum is only moderately obscure.
> It's the one Olimex points its customers to, and we
> mention it as a "User's Forum" in our documentation.
>
Interesting - I did not even know about it until this thread.
Do we really want to point users to a forum wh
Flemming Futtrup wrote:
> I used "Beyond Compare to compare the SST39VF16/32/64-01 and the
> 39VF640XB specs, and besides H vs 555H and 2AAAH vs 2AAH differences
> I also noticed another difference between the 39VF and 39VFB.
>
> Taken from the SST 39VF6401B spec:
>
> "This is that some
Rolf Meeser wrote:
>> flash bank cfi 0x8000 0x80 2 2 $_TARGETNAME jedec_probe
>>
>
> I'm surprised that this works! :-)
> As far as I understand, the "jedec_probe" option selects the wrong unlock
> addresses for this flash. The option is required for the non-B versions of
> the SST f
On Thu, Dec 31, 2009 at 9:01 AM, David Brownell wrote:
> Do you have a strategy for finding these, or are you just
> tripping over these problems? Either way is fine, but I'm
> curious.
At the beginning, just by chance.
I'm adding support to new SOC and board based on arm926, and a new JTAG devic
13 matches
Mail list logo
