On 26/08/2014 1:39 am, Joel Sherrill wrote:
I am thrilled to see this code finally becoming more widely available.
I am now asking questions about "productization" which is reproducibility,
maintainability, making it available to users, enhancement path, etc.
Would it be possible to update the blog to reflect the current location
of the code?
What blog ? There is also the wiki page that needs updating.
Chris.. does having this in rtems-tools mean that a standard *-rtems*
gdb will have the Python pretty printers?
No. These files are not installed by default. I am adding waf support so
you can install them under a prefix and under that prefix it assumes you
have an installed gdb. To begin with the RTEMS support will not
automatically load. You will need to use:
(gdb) py import rtems
to get the support loaded. That may change once the support is more stable.
My intention is to have the RSB install these for you so RSB built tools
will be default have this support.
Is there an up to date status of which core handlers and managers
have at least an initial pretty printer?
No. I have only just imported the repo and I did that as a way to see
how to merge one repo into another, ie the rtl-host repo.
The scripts do not work as are and I am looking into this.
Is there anyway to automate testing these? I know the gdb macros
that I mostly wrote were a pain in the *&%$ to make sure they
stayed up to date and in sync. It was easy to miss them for months
after a change impacted them.
No at the moment. To test you need a suitable gdb and RTEMS executable
and that executable needs to have the all the APIs included the test
script requires. I do no think such a test exists.
Chris
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
devel@rtems.org
http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
