Squirrels have fuzzy tails.
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
I will commit my changes for Linux a soon as I can access the CVS. They should be needed for MacOSX as well.Chelmi.
Quote from: chelmi on November 02, 2009, 12:47:32 PMI will commit my changes for Linux a soon as I can access the CVS. They should be needed for MacOSX as well.Chelmi.Chelmi - coz I'm trying to get a new release together I've made your changes. But it would still be good to know if you can now access CVs ok.
I'd also like to write a Makefile to compile the lib under linux and mac.
QuoteI'd also like to write a Makefile to compile the lib under linux and mac.I'd rather avoid this if possible . . . if not, perhaps just like sys files we can also have OS files. Just put in a header file for your selected OS. No header file defaults to Windows.Or something like that - Webbot usually has better ideas than me for this!
Quote from: Admin on November 02, 2009, 02:01:46 PMQuoteI'd also like to write a Makefile to compile the lib under linux and mac.I'd rather avoid this if possible . . . if not, perhaps just like sys files we can also have OS files. Just put in a header file for your selected OS. No header file defaults to Windows.Or something like that - Webbot usually has better ideas than me for this! I'm not sure to understand what you mean here :pI just want a way to compile the lib under Linux, nothing specific to linux here. Right now there is nothing to build the lib without WinAVR :pChelmi.
Hi ChelmiQuote from: chelmi on November 02, 2009, 02:19:00 PMQuote from: Admin on November 02, 2009, 02:01:46 PMQuoteI'd also like to write a Makefile to compile the lib under linux and mac.I'd rather avoid this if possible . . . if not, perhaps just like sys files we can also have OS files. Just put in a header file for your selected OS. No header file defaults to Windows.Or something like that - Webbot usually has better ideas than me for this! I'm not sure to understand what you mean here :pI just want a way to compile the lib under Linux, nothing specific to linux here. Right now there is nothing to build the lib without WinAVR :pChelmi.I currently build the library from a command line - but using Ant - which non-Java folk probably wont know about.Equally I tend to build my 'example' files (unpublished so far) using Ant as well.But when working on a given project I tend to use AVRStudio or Eclipse IDEsSo I don't really tend to use C makefiles much. But I'm sure that others do.So it would be great if you were willing to contribute say:1 - A generic makefile for an end application that just uses the lib (ie one C file, many H files, + the lib)2 - A generic makefile to build the library itself. Hopefully one that will cope, unmodified, with any new *.c files and also allow the whole lib to built for various different mcus and clock speeds."If" you understand Ant then I can send you (or you can get from CVS) the build.xml that builds my library across each target processor - which may be of help.
That's more or less what I was planing to do
hi Webbot.out of interest,what is in your ant build.xml file? any chance of a link to where you got it?
i've been reading up on ant all day but am unable to find much on building C applications with it. everything i've found so far has been either very dated or aimed at Java.(i do keep finding misspellings of "and" in my search results though...)i'm sure i could work it out eventually but there is obviously a source of documentation i'm missing out there somewhere...
Going back to an email me and Webbot had on Ant last year, we really need an 'Ant for WebbotLib developers tutorial'
Quote from: dunk on February 09, 2010, 10:22:03 PMhi Webbot.out of interest,what is in your ant build.xml file? any chance of a link to where you got it?Just open it. Where did I get it - well I just wrote it!
i still haven't found anything on using ant to build C for AVRs though.
I can pull the latest CVS and compile on a mac (Snow Leopard) with ant. I did not need to install anything special besides xcode and the avr package (CrossPack-AVR-20090415). I did have to remove some chips that my compiler didnt know about from the build.xml but that was painless to do.
The big benefit of Ant over a 'makefile' is I can add new source files and Ant just does it - whereas for a makefile I have to add them all in by hand. Pain.
The Ant build.xml file also builds each CPU library seperately or all in one go. I hate makefiles !!