From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 8665 invoked by alias); 19 Sep 2005 09:30:03 -0000 Mailing-List: contact ecos-discuss-help@ecos.sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: ecos-discuss-owner@ecos.sourceware.org Received: (qmail 8602 invoked by uid 22791); 19 Sep 2005 09:29:59 -0000 Received: from londo.lunn.ch (HELO londo.lunn.ch) (80.238.139.98) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.30-dev) with ESMTP; Mon, 19 Sep 2005 09:29:59 +0000 Received: from lunn by londo.lunn.ch with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 1EHHyF-0006KT-00; Mon, 19 Sep 2005 11:29:55 +0200 Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2005 14:37:00 -0000 To: Dirk Husemann Cc: ecos-discuss@sources.redhat.com Message-ID: <20050919092955.GA24142@lunn.ch> Mail-Followup-To: Dirk Husemann , ecos-discuss@sources.redhat.com References: <68b1f76405091810591118123@mail.gmail.com> <20050918184248.GA8421@lunn.ch> <432E75B3.1040508@zurich.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <432E75B3.1040508@zurich.ibm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.10i From: Andrew Lunn Subject: Re: [ECOS] eCos Configuration Tool X-SW-Source: 2005-09/txt/msg00142.txt.bz2 > >I think the configtool is more to keep the commercial clients happy > >where the management people have a percieved need for a "friendly GUI" > >when they buy eCos from the companies that give commercial support. I > >don't remember anybody actually contributing patches for the > >configtool, so from an open source perspective, the configtool is > >dead. The RTOS is what people are interested in, not the tools needed > >to configure it. > > > > > actually, no. in my experience, both tools and embeddedOS are what ppl > are interested in. some developers are more comfortable with > commandline, some like GUI, some use both (i find it easier to find > things/options in configtool). I worded that badly. What i ment was developers are interested in developing the RTOS further. Lots of people contribute patches for the RTOS. Nobody seems interesting in developing the tools further. Nobody contributes patchs for the tools. > also, while i'm at it :-) both configtool and ecosconfig copy header > files into the install tree, it would be extremely helpful if we could > have an option to symlink instead --- why? well, debugging with GDB > within emacs: gdb ends up using the correct .c files, but unfortunately > uses the copied .h files, nasty if you spot a bug in the .h file, fix it > and then are surprised that the bug fix disappeared (because it was made > to a header file in the install tree and not in the originating ecos tree). I've fallen faul of the same problem once or twice until i got used to it. Well this is a good chance to show that people are interested in to the tools. Please contribute a patch to add this feature to the tools :-) Andrew -- Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://ecos.sourceware.org/fom/ecos and search the list archive: http://ecos.sourceware.org/ml/ecos-discuss