On Monday 29 June 2009, Zach Welch wrote: > > > +That OpenOCD Users's Guide contains information about OpenOCD-specific > > > +configuration options that are available. > > > > I'd rather not see the User's guide get further clutter like > > such config/install instructions... those are for developers, > > or maybe packagers, not normal users. > > Okay, except those options are already described therein. I am all for > moving them, but I opted for a "least change" type of patch to start. > Personally, I think the recent discussions (and my "packaging for 0.2.0" > post) point us in the direction that you are suggesting, so I would be > happy to see us move these bits to the Developer Manual at this time. > > Thoughts?
Ideally, in my book, README says how to make a quick build that works for better than 90% of folk ... by using "sh configure" ... maybe with --prefix, but not needing anything else. And "sh configure --help" has good enough explanations about what each option means. Clearly we're not there today. Example, "configure" doesn't just notice that libftdi is present and then enable all FT2232-based drivers by default (using that code not D2XX). Or failing that, that D2XX is there. (Or failing both, warn that the "signature" support of OpenOCD is missing...) And "configure --help" doesn't show which settings are default vs not... So I guess I'm thinking I'd like to see the config scripts simplified to that point, so that there's much less of a need to resolve questions like where the doc should sit. :) Plus note the chicken/egg thing: it should not be necessary to build the software in order to get docs about how to configure it... - Dave _______________________________________________ Openocd-development mailing list [email protected] https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/openocd-development
