John Luciani wrote:
On 4/6/07, Bevan Weiss <[email protected]> wrote:
John Luciani wrote:
On 4/6/07, Bevan Weiss <[email protected]> wrote:
I just tried to do a straight compile and it also appears to fail.
The command I used was
msp430-gcc -c Handheld.c
which by all accounts should have failed for many many reasons... not
defining the processor type, missing F_CPU definition, amongst others.
Your msp430-gcc command line from the Makefile has a lot more switches.
You at least need the -mmcu=msp430x1471 but you probably need a few
of the other switches as well.
(* jcl *)
Shouldn't I still get an error message if I don't define these additional
switches? I'm just having msp430-gcc return with no error message, however
it also doesn't create any output files. Clearly it shouldn't output any
files in this situation, but it should still present error messages as to
what happened.
I misread your message. I thought you were getting a missing CPU
definition error.
My mistake.
I agree that if you ask for output and nothing is output an error
should be returned.
I have never seen this problem. Your original problem looks like a
linker problem.
I believe it's the one problem, that being the lack of gcc
functionality. Make is going to fail if gcc doesn't return the correct
success value, which is likely what's happening. Make would then
display the error message reported by gcc, but there is no error message
and so nothing is displayed.
I'm going to try another reinstall, and then I'll swap computers.
My other computer seems to have an issue with the makefile itself and
make 3.80.
The makefile section in question is:
sizebefore:
@if test -f $(NAME).elf; then echo; echo $(MSG_SIZE_BEFORE);
$(ELFSIZE); \
echo; fi
It seems that the -f flag to test isn't expected at this point. It's
worked previously on other computers so I'm at a loss again as to why it
wouldn't work. It seems that MSPGCC is a bit fussy about certain
configurations..
