It may not be clear to folks who haven't been watching closely, but mspgcc would not be the going concern I try to keep it without cooperation from Texas Instruments.
TI was willing back in September 2010 to provide mspgcc with customized headers and device data so that all 300+ MCUs can be supported, including the Value Line components and the LaunchPad. Prior to that, C headers, linker scripts, and the compiler and assembler sources were hand-edited to add material manually copied from individual datasheets, an error-prone and absolutely unmaintainable approach. Had the old process remained in place, I would certainly have stopped my involvement with mspgcc in early 2011 when I left the last job that funded its evolution. I can also say that the 4.6.1 development series would not exist without TI support. Please keep in mind this, and the fact that not everybody who works for a multinational is a shill for their marketing department, when responding to well-meant contributions on this list. I'd also like introduce Rosty Stolyar, the TI employee responsible for maintaining the headers and device descriptions that make MSPGCC a viable software toolchain. You may see him assigned to tracker tickets related to the msp430mcu component. Peter ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Virtualization & Cloud Management Using Capacity Planning Cloud computing makes use of virtualization - but cloud computing also focuses on allowing computing to be delivered as a service. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfnl/114/51521223/ _______________________________________________ Mspgcc-users mailing list Mspgcc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mspgcc-users
