As it turned out in the discussion of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64576
in GCC 5 we have a change of the default language
https://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-5/changes.html
Lets see if this was the only problem.
On 13/01/15 16:52, Joel Sherrill wrote:
On 1/13/2015 12:11 AM, Sebastian Hu
Should be fixed with
http://git.rtems.org/rtems/commit/?id=6042fdb7dd67d6261f433fb187b2b5bd70c876d4
On 13/01/15 23:10, Joel Sherrill wrote:
Hi
The mcf5206elite, beagle, and gen5200 BSPs define the symbol I2C_TIMEOUT
in a BSP specific include file. The Beagle actually uses the symbol in
BSP co
Hi
The mcf5206elite, beagle, and gen5200 BSPs define the symbol I2C_TIMEOUT
in a BSP specific include file. The Beagle actually uses the symbol in
BSP code.
The others just define it.
The mcf5206elite fails to build the i2c01 test as follows:
In file included from
../../../../../mcf5206elite/li
On 1/13/2015 12:11 AM, Sebastian Huber wrote:
> Since this worked for a long time, this might be a CPP regression, but a
> %1 parameter doesn't really look like a C construct.
I filed this as GCC PR 64576 and am doing a git bisect now.
I would like to get a ruling and/or suggestion for it. This
Hi,
We are thinking about a "supervisor" watchdog, which runs in a high
priority task, and
has the following characteristics:
a) tasks that "want" to be supervised are registered in the supervisor watchdog
b) each supervised task is in one of the following mode:
- automatic supervision
