On Saturday 30 May 2009, Øyvind Harboe wrote:
> OpenOCD is currently single threaded so sending keep alive messages
> is tedious... pthreads is a new can of works entirely, but perhaps it
> *would* be a good idea introduce some multithreaded capabilities in
> OpenOCD?
I'd think that's a technicall
This looks good to me. I'm not sure what a good long term solution
might be.
A requirement/goal of OpenOCD is that it should "just work"
with the default settings when using "monitor" commands w/GDB.
Really this warning is a reminder to OpenOCD developers to fix the code so
"monitor XXX" commands
, 2009 6:38 PM
To: Nicolas Pitre
Cc: openocd-development@lists.berlios.de
Subject: Re: [Openocd-development] [PATCH] shut up GDB debugging when no GDB
connections are used
On Wednesday 27 May 2009, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
>
> > > > I see messages about needing to increase some GDB timeout
On Wednesday 27 May 2009, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
>
> > > > I see messages about needing to increase some GDB timeout/interval. But
> > > > that's foolishness, since I'm not even working with GDB when they start
> > > > spamming me.
> > >
> > > This is indeed really irritating.
> > >
> > > What ab
On May 27, 2009, at 1:16 PM, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
On Mon, 25 May 2009, David Brownell wrote:
On Monday 25 May 2009, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
On Sat, 23 May 2009, David Brownell wrote:
I see messages about needing to increase some GDB timeout/
interval. But
that's foolishness, since I'm not ev
On Mon, 25 May 2009, David Brownell wrote:
> On Monday 25 May 2009, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> > On Sat, 23 May 2009, David Brownell wrote:
> >
> > > I see messages about needing to increase some GDB timeout/interval. But
> > > that's foolishness, since I'm not even working with GDB when they start
