(Cc'ing Henrik again - I think he isn't subscribed to the list.)
As greu...@mgtek.com wrote:
> What I meant to say was in the context of this patch, i.e. Windows specific.
> I would not remove parallel port support altogether, but I suggest to
> disable it for Windows (both x86 and x64), and
> I do still use a parallel port for programming, on Linux though.
Fair enough. BTW, you are not the only dinosaur around here: I own a PCIe
serial/parallel adapter card, too, mostly for nostalgic reasons ;-).
> As long as it's working, I wouldn't really want to drop it. We abstracted
the
> "logical" layer from the physical one long time ago, and thus the logical
layer is
> being re-used above other physical layers as well.
What I meant to say was in the context of this patch, i.e. Windows specific.
I
As Marius Greuel wrote:
> IMHO, we should drop support for parallel ports. I just cannot imagine
> anyone still using parallel ports for AVR programming.
As long as it's working, I wouldn't really want to drop it. We abstracted
the "logical" layer from the physical one long time ago, and thus
> > Follow-up Comment #3:
> > Is this really still relevant, given that parallel-port computers are
> > no longer really available?
> Yes, as InpOut32.dll, available as InpOutX64.dll for a 64-bit version of
avrdude,
> enables redirection of bit-banging to any hardware, not only the parallel
port
>
As Henrik Haftmann wrote:
> > Is this really still relevant, given that parallel-port computers are no
> > longer really available?
> Yes, as InpOut32.dll, available as InpOutX64.dll for a 64-bit version of
> avrdude, enables redirection of bit-banging to any hardware, not only the
> parallel
Follow-up Comment #3:
Is this really still relevant, given that parallel-port computers are no
longer really available?
Yes, as InpOut32.dll, available as InpOutX64.dll for a 64-bit version
of avrdude, enables redirection of bit-banging to any hardware, not
only the parallel port but also
