John Hartman (NoICE) wrote: > My intent was to make it easier for people to get gdb and OpenOCD > running. The volume of "how do I do it" traffic here and on > SparkFun indicates to me that things could be made easier.
This is a good initiative, but I think it's important to consider the different components involved. > But if the change seems unwise to the expects, I am happy to > withdraw my proposal. I like your goal, but I don't think OpenOCD should be working around the behavior of gdb, or even higher level tools. Better just fix gdb or the other tools. Does the gdb load command (with or without parameters) always send an address to OpenOCD? If so, then gdb obviously also needs to know the address it should send. That could come from the user, from another tool, or from the binary. Adding an alias to OpenOCD isn't the right fix to the problem of users or tools interfacing with gdb but not telling gdb the whole story IMO. //Peter _______________________________________________ Openocd-development mailing list [email protected] https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/openocd-development
