On 05 Feb 2015, at 00:31, Freddie Chopin <freddie_cho...@op.pl> wrote:
> And this is the exact reason why I use all these options even though 75% > of them could be left-out and auto-detected. fully agree. returning to the actual options, can we decide what options should be used for binary distribution builds (even if Peter totally opposes the idea) that must support most reasonable devices, old and new? several questions: for version 0.9.0, assuming the libusb-1/libusb-0(posix)/libusb-w32(windows)/libhid/libftdi libraries are already available, in the list below - which options are harmful and should be removed? - which options are silently ignored and have absolutely no effect? - are there any other options that might be added? (I would explicitly use all options available, even if the defaults are similar.) --enable-aice \ --enable-amtjtagaccel \ --enable-armjtagew \ --enable-cmsis-dap \ --enable-ftdi \ --enable-gw16012 \ --enable-jlink \ --enable-jtag_vpi \ --enable-opendous \ --enable-openjtag_ftdi \ --enable-osbdm \ --enable-legacy-ft2232_libftdi \ --enable-parport \ --disable-parport-ppdev \ --enable-parport-giveio \ --enable-presto_libftdi \ --enable-remote-bitbang \ --enable-rlink \ --enable-stlink \ --enable-ti-icdi \ --enable-ulink \ --enable-usb-blaster-2 \ --enable-usb_blaster_libftdi \ --enable-usbprog \ --enable-vsllink regards, Liviu ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Dive into the World of Parallel Programming. The Go Parallel Website, sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net/ _______________________________________________ OpenOCD-devel mailing list OpenOCD-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openocd-devel
