> > Well, it replaced both CCS and the old MSP430 GCC, and I think the > concensus is that it's for the good. There were issues in the > beginning, but now it's being worked on by both RedHat and TI, and > nobody recommends the old stuff for use any more. > > The usual argument for GCC is that it's relentlessly getting better; > proprietary alternatives tend to lose their initial advantage because > GCC contributors have a look at the differences and implement the > improvements. Look how far Dimitar got it, working on his own. >
Well the msp430-gcc-4.6.3 is still the go to to tool chain for many in the gcc cap for the msp430G2 family MCU's. At least the ones meant to be used in the MSP430G2 v1.5 launchpad. There are some newer MCU's like the MSp430G2955 that have more flash and more RAM than the older G2's, end require the newer compilers. Something to do with memory addressing I believe, but it's been a long time since I've worried about all that. My personal favorite MSP430 is the G2553 . . . This is also the same compiler that comes with Debian I believe but perhaps that one was also P.A. Bigot's. The compiler I prefer to use actually comes with Energia, which also may be a port of P.A. Bigot's original project? Not sure. On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 5:47 PM, Przemek Klosowski < [email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 11:09 AM, William Hermans <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > Granted, now, I've read that redhat was contracted to build a newer gcc > port > > a few years back, and that this gcc is actually used by CCS now days( for > > the MSP430 toolchain ). It is purported to support the newer MSP430G2 > > variants, among others, but still is not as reliable as the gcc > toolchain it > > was meant to replace. > > Well, it replaced both CCS and the old MSP430 GCC, and I think the > concensus is that it's for the good. There were issues in the > beginning, but now it's being worked on by both RedHat and TI, and > nobody recommends the old stuff for use any more. > > The usual argument for GCC is that it's relentlessly getting better; > proprietary alternatives tend to lose their initial advantage because > GCC contributors have a look at the differences and implement the > improvements. Look how far Dimitar got it, working on his own. > > -- > For more options, visit http://beagleboard.org/discuss > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "BeagleBoard" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/beagleboard/CAC%3D1GgGH-eijzdkeyj9cL8O9jiGJj2QZ0L%3DqPNRFbH7%2B2R6cuQ%40mail.gmail.com > . > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- For more options, visit http://beagleboard.org/discuss --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "BeagleBoard" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/beagleboard/CALHSORqJewKXHCfm%2BJx5rA61_MyadfCh73ZeA6340Xw89K3WqQ%40mail.gmail.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
