As Francois Lorrain wrote:
> That's why I am calling my modification a hack :-) I couldn't even figure
> out how to tell the configure script to look for libusb-1.0 instead of
> libusb.
Have a look into AVRDUDE's configure.ac, I've already done it there.
> For the regular command / response proc
Hello Joerg,
I realized towards the end of my work on Avarice and libusb that
effectively, libusb 1.0 could provide a socket interface which could used
in this case.
That's why I am calling my modification a hack :-) I couldn't even figure
out how to tell the configure script to look for libusb-1.
Hello Francois,
> I ended up modifying avarice to use libusb-1.0 directly.
> It is a hack more than a nice clean architecture improvment ... but it
> could be useful if somebody sees the same issue.
Well, actually I'd be very interested in getting a clean
implementation of libusb-1.0.
The entire
Hello Jörg,
I could not get avarice to work reliably for me under Debian X64, even the
old libusb was showing this de-synchronization I describe below.
I ended up modifying avarice to use libusb-1.0 directly.
It is a hack more than a nice clea
On Sat, Sep 1, 2012 at 12:25 PM, Francois Lorrain <
f
Hello Jörg,
It should still be the 0.1 libusb :
# ldd /usr/local/bin/avarice
linux-vdso.so.1 => (0x7fff265da000)
*libusb-0.1.so.4 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libusb-0.1.so.4
(0x7f743f0a1000)
*libbfd-2.22-system.so =>
/usr/lib/libbfd-2.22-system.so(0x7f743ed9e000)
As Francois Lorrain wrote:
> For libusb, it is the default version provided by debian wheezy.
Which version is that?
AVaRICE still uses the libusb 0.1 API. If your libusb is 1.x,
it's probably using an 0.1 API wrapper. It could easily be
possible that wrapper has a bug or two.
--
cheers, J"o
Hello,
Let me doublecheck my setup, I have a long USB cable and a powered hub at
the end to connect to the Dragon, it seems to work fine (works with
avrdude) but it might be causing some issue during JTAG debugging.
I'll get back to you after I try to connect the Dragon directly to the
developmen
As Francois Lorrain wrote:
> I just did a quick test using 5 s for JTAG_TIMEOUT from 1s, does not
> seem to help see the attached logs ...
It's weird.
I wonder whether you've got some issue with the USB stack, or libusb
or such.
--
cheers, J"org .-.-. --... ...-- -.. . DL8DT
Hello Jörg,
Thanks for the quick answer, I'll try to increase the timeouts in jtag.h
But I'll be happy to try svn version too ...
I just did a quick test using 5 s for JTAG_TIMEOUT from 1s, does not seem
to help see the attached logs ...
I get much longer timeouts
Anyway I can try the svn versi
As Francois Lorrain wrote:
> got wrong sequence number, 49 != 50
> recv: timeout
I think the timeouts are the actual problem.
I've never seen it that way before, and I've also been using V 7.x
firmware recently.
If you want, you could give the SVN version of AVaRICE a try. I've
rearranged the
10 matches
Mail list logo
