> > I agree that scripting does add functionality, but what i also like 
> > about openocd is that it can be standalone.
> 
> Please define standalone.
> 
> OpenOCD needs the executable + some other files it ships 
> with, but it does not depend on any other modules to be installed.
> 
> Is that standalone?
> 

standalone i mean openocd + config.

> 
> > I know a lot of people who use openocd with a single script and the 
> > binary for production programming, reproducing the dir 
> structure does 
> > not suit everybody.
> 
> What's the downside to duplicating the entire directory structure?
> 

There is no downside, trying to keep things simple for the user.

> > embedding commands.tcl would suit everybody would it not?
> 
> I believe that we'll have to cross the bridge that OpenOCD 
> requires the executable + other files it ships with, sooner 
> rather than later anyway.
> 

maybe so, but embedding the core tcl functions to me seem a good compromise.

> I'd especially like all OpenOCD distributions out there to 
> ship with the target library to help get the target library 
> known and get target config files contributed back.
> 
> If someone must(why?) minimize the # of files OpenOCD ships 
> with, they still can.
> 
> They can even embed commands.tcl into the single config file, 
> though this doesn't really strike me as a killer feature.
> 

Pretty much all of the users i come across use the target lib for reference
and that's it.
Once they have their config they will put it in the openocd dir and leave it
alone.

Cheers
Spen

_______________________________________________
Openocd-development mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/openocd-development

Reply via email to