Martin Panter wrote: > On 08/05/2009, David Brownell <davi...@pacbell.net> wrote: > >> On Thursday 07 May 2009, David Brownell wrote: >> > http://search.cpan.org/~infinoid/App-SVN-Bisect-0.8/bin/svn-bisect >> >> >> Well that was a waste of a few hours. It got into a mode >> where it kept producing unbuildable trees, with refs to >> jtag_add_dr_scan_now() added in r1629 but not, so far as >> a quick scan says to me, actually referenced before that. >> >> Does someone maybe have a git version of OpenOCD? I know >> that "git bisect" works quite well. If there isn't one >> ready (and why not just switch to GIT?) then I'll likely >> create a local one. >> > > I never used git bisect so I don't know exactly how it works. But what > I would probably do is manually just run "svn up -rXXX", recompile and > test, and then re-adjust the revision XXX up or down and try again. > For example: (revision numbers are completely made up) > > svn up -r1600 > make > # test, works okay > svn up -r1700 > make > # test, fails > svn up -r1650 > make > # test again > > Also I might try looking at "svn log" for the particular revisions > that look like they could be culprits, instead of blindly halving the > revision numbers. > _______________________________________________ > Openocd-development mailing list > Openocd-development@lists.berlios.de > https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/openocd-development > I maintain that the whole jtag_add_dr_scan_now and changing of in_handler functionality must be reverted. Im am not sure about the exact rev, Öyvind PLEASE, you are at the moment screwing up things for other people without good cause.
There might be a good idea there somwhere, but I am not convinced, and at the moment it is just messing up things. Regards, Magnus _______________________________________________ Openocd-development mailing list Openocd-development@lists.berlios.de https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/openocd-development
