Steve Underwood wrote:
Hi,
Some documentation would be *very* good. That is why we have a manual.
What it says in the manual is still the current recommended way to
build. GCC 3.3.x doesn't really have any advantages. 3.4.x still seems
to have issues. I think GCC 3.2.3 is still the most workable version.
That is the one the documentation describes how to build. The
documentation should be updated in relation to binutils, since you need
the patch binutils to get support for some of the newer devices. Also, I
really should put the latest gdbproxy on the sourceforge site, where the
documentation says you should look. Apart from that, I think the
documentation is still OK.
We do get a number of people complaining they have given up trying to
build the tools, while they admit to never having looked at the manual.
:-) Also, far too many people are *trying* to build the software. Lots
of them are using windows. The windows installers are a much better
choice for them, in most cases.
Well I'm one of those which are experienced (Linux) GCC users. I have
been using gcc for other embedded targets a lot. I have never been using
so much time to figure out how to get a toolchain up and running before,
that I had with this one. One of the biggest timeconsumers was to grep
through all the docs and finding only that halfpage of usable info that
is required for building this stuff.
When I read the manual, it doesnt tell you very much (chapter 1.2 and
11.1-11.2). And quite francly, since a 3.3.x and 3.4.x version is
available, I guessed that the docs is obsolete and a newer
reccommendation is available.
IMHO a little note that the newer versions aren't stable/working would
be good. In that manner you'd inform the users that this doc is still
updated and they would trust the source saying that gcc 3.2.3 is still
in the game.
And the naming clobber with the CVS gcc version is confusing at best. I
had to do 5 gcc recompilations before I found a working official gcc +
msp430 gcc patch combination. So yes: documentation is very important at
this stage, but its not quite there yet.
But, its very little which needs be done to lower the introduction gap:
o Write a readme file in the gcc CVS directories with the build
procedure and a note about its stability
o Put up a simple build info web page (in addition to the chapter in
the doc) - user find it easier to find in a webpage, than into a manual.
o Update the docs saying that gcc-3.4.x and gcc-3.3.x is unstable.
Svein (trying to be constructive)
