From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <ecos-devel-return-1494-listarch-ecos-devel=sources.redhat.com@ecos.sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 5305 invoked by alias); 26 May 2009 21:06:53 -0000
Received: (qmail 5286 invoked by uid 22791); 26 May 2009 21:06:52 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.2 required=5.0 	tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from anika.2020media.com (HELO smtp.2020smtp.net) (212.124.192.214)     by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 26 May 2009 21:06:42 +0000
Received: from [212.124.199.38] (helo=[192.168.0.2]) 	by smtp.2020smtp.net with esmtp (Exim 4.63) 	(envelope-from <chris@zynaptic.com>) 	id 1M93r3-0000eO-V4; Tue, 26 May 2009 22:06:38 +0100
Message-ID: <4A1C59DB.9070708@zynaptic.com>
Date: Tue, 26 May 2009 21:06:00 -0000
From: Chris Holgate <chris@zynaptic.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.19 (X11/20081227)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Simon Kallweit <simon.kallweit@intefo.ch>
CC: Frank Pagliughi <fpagliughi@mindspring.com>,   ecos-devel@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: Eval board for testing STM32 USB
References: <DD9BA4A07313441D93DE1AF867FCE3BB@Intrigue63> <4A1BB326.4010809@zynaptic.com> <4A1BB74A.2080108@intefo.ch> <4A1C4270.2050404@mindspring.com> <4A1C4491.1060706@intefo.ch>
In-Reply-To: <4A1C4491.1060706@intefo.ch>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact ecos-devel-help@ecos.sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <ecos-devel.ecos.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:ecos-devel-subscribe@ecos.sourceware.org>
List-Post: <mailto:ecos-devel@ecos.sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ecos-devel-help@ecos.sourceware.org>, <http://ecos.sourceware.org/lists.html#faqs>
Sender: ecos-devel-owner@ecos.sourceware.org
X-SW-Source: 2009-05/txt/msg00074.txt.bz2

Simon Kallweit wrote:
> Frank Pagliughi schrieb:
>> Hey Guys,
>>
>> It seems like it would be worthwhile for me to get an SMT32 board to
>> test some new USB code. Make sure it works on a couple different
>> targets. Should I get the *STM3210E-EVAL board, or would an Olimex
>> board be better?
> 
> I would get the STM3210E for now. It is what's currently supported so I
> think we should build on that.

I second that - I did play around with the Olimex board a while back,
but the device they ship with is pretty limiting.  Plus the STM3210E
board has the external SRAM for debugging using Redboot/GDB.  That's
worth the extra money all on its own!

Chris.