AVR Studio 5 Released - Get Your BETA Here!

Go To Last Post
472 posts / 0 new

Pages

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

I still cannot even install the .NET framework in Crossover (WINE) on my Mac.

So sorry Charlie. No joy in Mudvillle, here!

What version of the .NET should be used to try a "preinstall"?

Jim

 

Until Black Lives Matter, we do not have "All Lives Matter"!

 

 

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

Quote:

What's this - "Solution Files"? WTF is a "Solution File"?

It is Microsofts term for a combination of projects. A "superproject" if you wish. Or a multi-project container.

As of January 15, 2018, Site fix-up work has begun! Now do your part and report any bugs or deficiencies here

No guarantees, but if we don't report problems they won't get much of  a chance to be fixed! Details/discussions at link given just above.

 

"Some questions have no answers."[C Baird] "There comes a point where the spoon-feeding has to stop and the independent thinking has to start." [C Lawson] "There are always ways to disagree, without being disagreeable."[E Weddington] "Words represent concepts. Use the wrong words, communicate the wrong concept." [J Morin] "Persistence only goes so far if you set yourself up for failure." [Kartman]

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

ka7ehk wrote:
I still cannot even install the .NET framework in Crossover (WINE) on my Mac.

So sorry Charlie. No joy in Mudvillle, here!

What version of the .NET should be used to try a "preinstall"?

Sadly you can't install .NET4 in wine, sine it relies on doing a genuine check of your Windows installation. So running AVR Studio 5 anytime soon in wine is not something to hope for. USB doesn't work anyway in wine, so you'll not be able to use any of the tools.

AVR Studio 5 works by running it in VirtualBox on a Linux host.

Hans-Christian

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

... setup fails ...

Error Code: -5001 : 0x80070002
Error Information:
>SetupNew\setup.cpp (142)
PAPP:
PVENDOR:
PGUID:

why is this build on .net ??
why not Cross-Platform ?
... time for me to change the controller vendor ... away from Atmel

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

Quote:

Question; is there a way to modify what the new main file contains when i start a new project? I like using my own comment block etc with a few standard includes and variables etc in every project.

Create a project the way you want it to be. Then select File->Export Template and follow instructions

Lars K

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

wek wrote:
Will there be a standalone "AVR-Tools" (WinAVR) release?

JW

Yes, there will be!

PerA.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

curtvm wrote:
I think they made a big mistake attaching themselves to the .NET mess. They get instant gratification at the expense of future headaches. Just wait and see.

In contrast, I have the lpcexpresso software sitting at about 300MB installed. It lives in its own folder, and I can move it to another pc (no install needed), or even run from a flash drive. You can also have different versions installed at the same time.

One lives in its own little self-contained world, the other is dependent on the current state of your particular .net installation- service packs, security updates, registry settings, etc.

It's not just big, it's also a stupid one. Couldn't agree more about the lpcexpresso.

ka7ehk wrote:

I still cannot even install the .NET framework in Crossover (WINE) on my Mac.

So sorry Charlie. No joy in Mudvillle, here!

What version of the .NET should be used to try a "preinstall"?

Jim

Unfortunately WINE doesn't support the .NET 4 Framework yet (it partly supports .NET 3 currently). Even if it gets supported though, we won't be able to interface the USB programmers/debuggers. The only possible solution is using VMWare, provided that even if we get it to play with Mono someday, the usb issues will still remain. Thank God they're using a "cross platform toolchain" (yes, I'm being sarcastic..).

markus_b wrote:

It looks like all those proud nordic countries companies are selling out to Microsoft, last week Nokia, this week Atmel.

That was a combo hit, indeed. I'm a proud owner of a N900 and I was really dissapointed to hear that Nokia is embracing the Windows Mobile suite and it drops its support and resources from Meego. Yet another stupid decision, IMHO.

Back to the A$5. Come on guys, this is not 2001, the embedded industry has provided us developers with a lot of options and solutions to choose from. The ARM Empire is even getting into Intel's eye and with the sub-dollar cortex-M0, you just can't afford to dissapoint the developers. Everyone, I mean everyone is moving to cross platform development solutions and there is a reason for this. I was waiting with great anticipation for the release of AS5 so I could switch to Linux at work and what do I get, a bloated .NET implementation for what, for a slightly better [citation needed] editor?

Now where did I put that Code Red installation CD...

So, now I know how ICs work:
they work with smoke.
Cause every time you let the smoke come out of an IC, it stops working.
I can prove it, too...

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

stephanbeha wrote:
... setup fails ...

Error Code: -5001 : 0x80070002
Error Information:
>SetupNew\setup.cpp (142)
PAPP:
PVENDOR:
PGUID:

why is this build on .net ??
why not Cross-Platform ?
... time for me to change the controller vendor ... away from Atmel

What operating system is this ?
If it is windows XP, Do you have service pack 3 ?

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

Well I would never normally install a Beta of anything (life's too short to be stuffing around with this type of thing) but after wading through the above 6 pages there's no way.

Apart from that there's no paractical way I can download 500M, until last week that would have been half of my monthly allowance, and it would have taken all month to download.

I use VS for VB progs and quite like it, but for the time being I'll stick with a good editor and a makefile for my AVR stuff.

______
Rob

Scattered showers my arse -- Noah, 2348BC.
Rob Gray, old fart, nature photographer, embedded hardware/software designer, and serial motorhome builder, www.robgray.com

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

This'll give me something to do today if only wait for the download to arrive. 32.8KB/s seems a bit nostalgic, takes me back a year or 2.

I should think the 'old' Studio 4 will be supported for sometime yet so no need to find another processor and tools straight away, still looking forward to seeing what might be possible with this lot though.

Well done Dean for being actively involved in the project, your hard work is clearly paying off.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

Quote:
PS Does this now mean the formation of a Studio 5 forum here? Or is the existing one going to be renamed 4 & 5? (how many posts, I wonder, will then fail to say which Studio they are talking about?

It is probably worth addressing sooner or later. There is now 3 or 4 threads on S5 all over the place.
How about AVR Software Framework>Studio 5?

Charles Darwin, Lord Kelvin & Murphy are always lurking about!
Lee -.-
Riddle me this...How did the serpent move around before the fall?

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

Thanks everyone for taking the time to record your experiences ... your pain is noted and I will not be following you walking through hell.

Ross McKenzie, Melbourne Australia

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

Quote:

nd disk space in Australia is obviously cheaper than in wherever clawson is from; using 0.05% of my disk is actually irrelevant.

You don't get a lot of choice with a laptop. (though I just got a 0.5TB external drive to back some stuff up so I can free space for things like AS5). But the old adage always applies "data expands to fit the space available" ;-). The laptop has 283GiB of storage partitioned as 144GiB and 139GiB. At the point I tried to install yesterday C: had just 3GiB free and D: had 11GiB (so that's where I chose to install it all). In total I had 14GiB free and at the end of the install this dropped considerably.

I don't mind "bloat" when it's justified but bloat for bloats sake is pointless. At the end of the day Visual Studio is only a text editor for goodness sake.

Of course a large part of this is the avr-gcc toolchain (in fact two of them, one of which is simply wasting space on my HDD). In the past I was in control of where I installed that and only had to point AS4 at where I'd put it. Maybe if I can work out the way to point AS5 at WinAVR20100110 (which I'm more than happy with) and ditch it's own "toolchain" things will be better?

Cliff

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

AVR Studio 5.0 installation instructions
System Requirements

Supported Operating Systems
Windows XP (x86) with Service Pack 3 - all editions except Starter Edition
Windows Vista (x86) with Service Pack 1 - all editions except Starter Edition
Windows XP (x64) with Service Pack 2
Windows Vista (x64) with Service Pack 1,
Windows 7 (x86 and x64)
Windows Server 2003 R2 (x86 and x64)

Hardware Requirements:
Computer that has a 1.6GHz or faster processor
1 GB RAM for x86
2 GB RAM for x64
3GB of available hard disk space
display resolution : 1024 x 768 or higher

Downloading and installing
Download the latest AVR Studio 5.0 installer.
Verify the hardware and software requirements
Make sure you are logged on with Administrative privileges.
Please save all your work before starting, because the installation might prompt you for a restart if required.
Please disconnect all Atmel USB hardware devices.
Double click the installer executable file. Please note that this might take some time to extract depending on H/W configuration.
AVR Studio Prerequisites installation will start. NOTE : If you have all the prerequisites already installed then this dialog will not be shown. If .NET Framework 4.0 is not already installed, the installer will start the .NET Framework setup.

Accept the licence agreement and proceed through the installation. If the installer prompts for restart please do so. After restart the installation will start automatically.

If Visual Studio Isolated shell 2010 is not installed, the installer will start the Shell Setup. Accept the licence agreement and proceed through the installation.

If Jungo USB Driver v10.2 is not already installed the installer will start the Jungo installation. Accept the licence agreement and proceed through the installation.

NOTE : If Jungo driver is already present and its version is anything less than v10.2, then the installer will update the Jungo driver you already have. The Jungo v10.2 is fully compatible with its previous versions. So AVR Studio 4 and Studio 32 should continue to work with the updated driver without any issues.

After this , AVR Studio 5.0 installation should start
Proceed through the installation.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

soundararajan wrote:
AVR Studio 5.0 installation instructions
System Requirements

Supported Operating Systems
Windows XP (x86) with Service Pack 3 - all editions except Starter Edition
Windows Vista (x86) with Service Pack 1 - all editions except Starter Edition
Windows XP (x64) with Service Pack 2
Windows Vista (x64) with Service Pack 1,
Windows 7 (x86 and x64)
Windows Server 2003 R2 (x86 and x64)


Excellent! My Win2K main development machine thanks you ... sincerely. I do also. And I just had a chat with my XP laptop and have assured her that she will not be "raped" either. She was so pleased!

Ross McKenzie, Melbourne Australia

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

Trym wrote:
STK500 will be supported.

Please, please let it be soon. S5 is no use to me without that, although I am likely to get an AVRISPII soon, just so I don't have to share a serial port (it's a PITA having to share one virtual port between two apps).

Cheers,

Joey

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

soundararajan wrote:

Quote:
Windows XP (x86) with Service Pack 3 - all editions except Starter Edition
Do you mean Home Edition ? AFAIK there is no Starter Edition for WinXP (x86)

A GIF is worth a thousend words   They are called Rosa, Sylvia, Tricia, and Ulyana. You can find them https://www.linuxmint.com/

Dragon broken ? http://aplomb.nl/TechStuff/Dragon/Dragon.html for how-to-fix tips

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

Quote:

AFAIK there is no Starter Edition for WinXP (x86)

There is/was - it was for developing countries only:

http://www.microsoft.com/presspa...

- Dean :twisted:

Make Atmel Studio better with my free extensions. Open source and feedback welcome!

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

Quote:
developing countries only
Pun intended? ;)

--greg
Still learning, don't shout at me, educate me.
Starting the fire is easy; the hardest part is learning how to keep the flame!

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

pab wrote:
wek wrote:
Will there be a standalone "AVR-Tools" (WinAVR) release?

JW

Yes, there will be!

PerA.

Thanks.

Any plans what will be included?

Jan

[EDIT, after reading posts above] ... and any plans what the system requirements will be?

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

It looks like the simulator does not support things like ATMega8/16/32. I hope that is just because this is a "beta" version.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

Quote:

I hope that is just because this is a "beta" version.

Go back to Studio4 and see what devices were supported by "Simulator" and what were supported by "Simulator 2". It looks like this only has SimV2 and there's no way to select the legacy simulator. Looks like yet another reason to stick with AS4.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

How to disable spell checking in code comments?

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

The offline help document "Known issues in AVR Simulator" says,

"AT90CAN*/ATmega*C*, AT90USB*/ATmega*U*, AT90PWM*, and ATtiny87/167 devices will never be supported by simulator models, for these devices the 8-bit instruction set simulator will have to be used"

Whereas the help document "Using Simulator in AVR Studio" states,

"The older simulator used in AVR Studio 4 is not supported in AVR Studio 5. It is planned to replace it with a 8-bit instruction set simulator similar to the 32-bit ISS found in AVR32 Studio."

clawson wrote:
Quote:

I hope that is just because this is a "beta" version.

Go back to Studio4 and see what devices were supported by "Simulator" and what were supported by "Simulator 2". It looks like this only has SimV2 and there's no way to select the legacy simulator. Looks like yet another reason to stick with AS4.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

clawson wrote:
Quote:

I hope that is just because this is a "beta" version.

Go back to Studio4 and see what devices were supported by "Simulator" and what were supported by "Simulator 2". It looks like this only has SimV2 and there's no way to select the legacy simulator. Looks like yet another reason to stick with AS4.

That is correct, the legacy simulator from AVR Studio 4 is not included in AVR Studio 5. The reason for this is that the AS5 debugger back-end (where the simulator lives) is multi-platform, while the AS4 legacy simulator is definitely not. It is our intention to broaden the simulator device support in AS5, but it will take a while before that work is completed.

- roland

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

I'm amazed at the apparent number of Atmel employees jumping in and defending/informing about AS5.

Are they rushing around internally with a) a Master Plan for AS5 that they are diligently following and b) some co-ordinator telling certain individuals to post certain things, and when
....or are they just free-spirit individuals giving their view of what they think will happen?

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

stele wrote:
How to disable spell checking in code comments?

Please check,
http://avrstudio5.wordpress.com/...

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

Quote:

.or are they just free-spirit individuals giving their view of what they think will happen?

If you read the "Dean in Norway" thread I'd say the latter. Sounds like almost everyone in Trondheim was involved and I guess they consider it "their baby" and are keen to defend it. I'm just amazed it's got to release with so many apparent shortcomings. Presumably it's been driven by marketing/management and not those who know what it really should contain? Things like missing simulator support for a regularly used AVR like mega16(A) or no RS232 device support seems like a major shot in the foot to me, and as for lack of cross-platform! But you can just imagine the management saying "oh, don't worry about that, no ones going to notice - are they?". Umm... yes.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

soundararajan wrote:

Please check,
http://avrstudio5.wordpress.com/...

Thanks

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

Quote:
I'm just amazed it's got to release with so many apparent shortcomings
It has not! It's a BETA not a Release Candidate. Beta versions are for user testing and the opertunity to receive feedback before issuing an RCx release, which also incorporates user feedback (and so on....) until the FINAL release candidate is a solid as it can be, then a Production Release is issued (that normally people have to pay for :) ).

--greg
Still learning, don't shout at me, educate me.
Starting the fire is easy; the hardest part is learning how to keep the flame!

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

It's quite amusing to compare the reactions here to the new Atmel tools, to those on the Microchip forum to the new MPLAB X beta. The latter seems to have been favourably received, despite people having a lot of problems with it. Microchip seems to have released it at a much earlier stage in its development than Atmel has done with their offering. It is cross-platform, running under Windows, Mac-OS and Linux.

Microchip has a special forum devoted to MPLAB X matters, Atmel should do the same for Studio 5.

Leon Heller G1HSM

Last Edited: Wed. Mar 2, 2011 - 02:38 PM
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

Greg,

Do you really think they are going to add back in STK500/JTAGICE/AVRprog and SimulatorV1 support at this stage? If so can I borrow your rose tinted spectacles to see what your viewpoint of the world looks like? ;-)

Oh and when exactly do you think they'll deliver the feature that everyone was actually hoping for: cross-platform support? Do you think that'll have to wait until RC2 or RC3? :?

Cliff

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

Just trying to balance the arguments for/against, Cliff :)
I produce software for a living. If my customers went on like 'you'us'them' lot I'd be seriously p!ssed off with the ungreatfull bunch of s0d's!
That being said, I'd be a little silly to release a beta that had over 50% of the required functionality disabled/not included.
Your dreams of cross platform compatability died the minute these guy's got into bed with Microshaft!

Sorry :)

--greg
Still learning, don't shout at me, educate me.
Starting the fire is easy; the hardest part is learning how to keep the flame!

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

Somewhere earlier in this thread some comments were made about the STK500. I get the feeling that Atmel is going to discontinue this product, they already have discontinued selling some of the expansion products for this (such as the 64 pin package adapter .. atmega128 etc). The STK500 is a nice quick way to start a design, however I've had good luck at lower cost with a simple general purpose third party development board for my chosen cpu package. These boards have just the cpu socket, crystal, rs232 (or usb serial), and lots of 'bread board' .1" grid area. You can do the same thing with one of those fancy breadboard sockets. Then just add an avrispII or Dragon (our your own choice of programmer) and you are in business. Yes, the STK500 provides most of this in one package, but you will need to add external breadboard space for your own custom hardware.

What was important about the STK500 is the built in programmer. The Dragon is a suitable replacement that does more. However Atmel shouldn't make the existing horde of STK500's out there become useless bricks, even if the platform will never be able to support newer parts (not until the parts it currently DOES support become history).

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

clawson wrote:

Maybe if I can work out the way to point AS5 at WinAVR20100110 (which I'm more than happy with) and ditch it's own "toolchain" things will be better?

Cliff

Yes, you can do that. Check out http://avrstudio5.wordpress.com/...

Regards

Senthil

 

blog | website

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

kscharf wrote:
Somewhere earlier in this thread some comments were made about the STK500. I get the feeling that Atmel is going to discontinue this product, ...
This has been pointed out before, but the STK500 will be eventually supported. From the S5 Release Notes:

Quote:
Report #13722: STK500 is not supported in beta release.
STK500 support is scheduled for final release of AVR Studio 5.0

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

MartinM57 wrote:
I'm amazed at the apparent number of Atmel employees jumping in and defending/informing about AS5.

Are they rushing around internally with a) a Master Plan for AS5 that they are diligently following and b) some co-ordinator telling certain individuals to post certain things, and when
....or are they just free-spirit individuals giving their view of what they think will happen?


Speaking for myself, not necessarily for all Atmelers here:

- The major reason we put out a public beta is to get feedback from users.
- This forum is one of the best places to get such feedback. Most of the Atmel people "jumping in" now are developers who have been working with the product for a long time, and we are naturally curious about how it will be received, and also want to try to help if problems arise.

We have been doing this earlier after major product releases, but then it has usually been over in the AVR Studio 4 forum and not here.

- roland

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

Now as things are out in the open, what was the rationale on choice of platform ?

Just at the moment I'm still deceived and I feel left out. The long silence has generated rumors and got my hopes up. In addition code red just released the Linux version of their NXP tools a couple of weeks ago, so the expectation level was high.

I would like more of the 'cross-platform' part. This was mentioned by Dean, but I fear this is only wishful thinking on his part. Are there any plans to at least distribute the gcc patches so we can get this for Mac and Linux ?

I'd like to feel some active participation by Atmel, not just a published huge tarball, where we must go fishing to extract the goods.

Markus

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

Quote:

What was important about the STK500 is the built in programmer.

And the programmable oscillator and the programmable PSU. The only other product that offers these is the STK600. It wouldn't be so bad if you could get it for $99 with the 40 pin DIP ZIF socket because then, for just $20 more you'd have the functionality of STK500 (and a bit) but it's the ridiculous price of the routing/socket cards that grates making a complete system silly money for anyone starting out (STK=STarter Kit remember!)
Quote:

If my customers went on like 'you'us'them' lot I'd be seriously p!ssed off with the ungreatfull bunch of s0d's!

Many of us produce commercial software/product and are equally p!ssed when it is not received well but the way Atmel shot themselves in the foot on this was two-fold:

1) they allowed details of it to leak almost 18 months before release that allowed a lot of resentment to build for "late" delivery. If they had kept quiet and just announced it to the world this week when it (well the beta) was ready then I imagine people may have been amazed (assuming they are Windows users of course!). But over-hyping then under-delivering is a classic way to blow a product out of the water at launch (rather ironically Microsoft are rather famous for this - "Vista" anyone?).

2) perhaps the biggest mistake that was made was someone from Atmel (maybe they weren't authorised?) saying that there would be "AS5" and inviting everyone to suggest what they'd like to see in it. That post (https://www.avrfreaks.net/index.php?name=PNphpBB2&file=viewtopic&p=634932#634932) was made 15 months ago allowing plenty of time for the suggestions to be considered and possibly taken on board. The resultant thread stretches to 12 pages and more than 50% of it is asking for cross-platform. Then when the thing is finally delivered it's not just bound to a single platform but it's found to be half the creation of the devil himself.

Personally I'm ambivolent about Microsoft. I've paid the $100+ for a license to use Windows and I spend half my time in Windows and half in Linux (and most of that is using VMs on a Windows host) but Atmel must realise that there's a lot of people in developing countries who simply cannot afford Bill's pound of flesh and need a solution to work on Linux. To pull down the blinkers and ignore this in 2011 seems nonsensical.

Quote:
Are there any plans to at least distribute the gcc patches so we can get this for Mac and Linux ?

As I said in the thread in GCC forum - Atmel are almost certainly in violation of GPL by not doing this. When the first "AVR Toolchain" didn't include the ./source directory holding *.patch as found in previous issues of WinAVR it looked like a simple build error/teething trouble. But the fact that this next incarnation of "toolchain" also fails to publish the patch set begins to look like a cavalier attitude to GPL.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

Quote:
To pull down the blinkers and ignore this in 2011 seems nonsensical.
Totally agree!
Quote:
The resultant thread stretches to 12 pages and more than 50% of it is asking for cross-platform.
Noted.
Bit of a shame they didn't get into bed with Steve, at least then, 'I' would be happy :)

--greg
Still learning, don't shout at me, educate me.
Starting the fire is easy; the hardest part is learning how to keep the flame!

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

Well. xxxxxx (expletive deleted)

I, like many, had what not turned out to be false hopes of a genuine cross-OS Studio5.

And, tying it to .NET? Sounds like the worst of all possible universes. Not only is it tied to Windows, it is tied to official Microsoft Approved "Windows(tm)" without the WINE, thank you!

Background - for high-level program development, I use RealBasic. It is a great cross-OS development system with libraries that produce graphical user interfaces, serial, USB, tcp/ip, on and on and on, cross-platform. Win, Mac, Linux. I would not dream of creating an app that does not work, and work well, on all three platforms. It is possible. And, it works!

My point? Shame on Atmel for not making use of the cross-platform technology that is out there and doing it right. In making the choice that was made, you loose 20% or more of your potential market! What a waste!

Jim

 

Until Black Lives Matter, we do not have "All Lives Matter"!

 

 

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

I'm not able to officially comment, however I would point you to what Roland said earlier:

Quote:

The reason for this is that the AS5 debugger back-end (where the simulator lives) is multi-platform

And you already know that the toolchain is cross platform. The only platform specific bit is the IDE frontend, which just happens to be free and not suck on Windows.

- Dean :twisted:

Make Atmel Studio better with my free extensions. Open source and feedback welcome!

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

>> The reason for this is that the AS5 debugger back-end
>> (where the simulator lives) is multi-platform

> And you already know that the toolchain is cross platform.

Now you're making me curious: how would one be able to use the
debugger back-end in a multi-platform way? (Remember, as soon
as the first step is to run a .exe, "multi-platform" is gone,
however multi-platform the backends might be.)

Jörg Wunsch

Please don't send me PMs, use email if you want to approach me personally.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

Quote:

Now you're making me curious: how would one be able to use the
debugger back-end in a multi-platform way? (Remember, as soon
as the first step is to run a .exe, "multi-platform" is gone,
however multi-platform the backends might be.)

Again, I'm speaking from a hobbyist perspective here - it looks like the current one communicates through some sort of socket interface, looking at the debug output in the Studio 5 console. If it uses a standard protocol you may be able to connect it up to GDB, Eclipse or something.

- Dean :twisted:

EDIT: Or do you mean the actual backend binaries? In that case, if it really is multiplatform, the same way the toolchain works - just recompile it.

Make Atmel Studio better with my free extensions. Open source and feedback welcome!

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

Quote:
And you already know that the toolchain is cross platform

So how is the "toolchain" multi-platform? Sure the .o's and .a's will work whatever system you build on but where are the Linux x386 binaries for avr-gcc, avr-as, avr-ld, et al that bind together that library code with the users compiled .c and .S files? If you are going to say "oh but you have to build the tools (but not the library) yourself" then let's have the *.patch to apply to a generic GCC build tree to be able to produce a work-alike on Linux.

As I say, Eric has been doing this for a while in WinAVR and the patches are hosted by Jörg on FreeBSD but without even a list of which patches have been applied how can one make a "workalike" set of binaries on Linux (or Mac OSX) ?

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

[multi-platform debugger backend]

> Or do you mean the actual backend binaries? In that case,
> if it really is multiplatform, the same way the toolchain
> works - just recompile it.

Well, but what sources do I recompile it from?

I'd be more than happy to see some AVR multi-platform debugger
backend, so if AVR Studio 5 is really just a convenient (for the Windows
users) editor yet everything else could be had without it, I'm pretty
sure this would be a *really* fine solution for anyone who doesn't want
to use Windows (or who is unable to use it, be it for economical or other
reasons, or simply since he's living in a country which is embargoed by
the USA).

Jörg Wunsch

Please don't send me PMs, use email if you want to approach me personally.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

abcminiuser wrote:
Quote:

Now you're making me curious: how would one be able to use the
debugger back-end in a multi-platform way? (Remember, as soon
as the first step is to run a .exe, "multi-platform" is gone,
however multi-platform the backends might be.)

Again, I'm speaking from a hobbyist perspective here - it looks like the current one communicates through some sort of socket interface, looking at the debug output in the Studio 5 console. If it uses a standard protocol you may be able to connect it up to GDB, Eclipse or something.


Yes, something like that. Also, we have Python wrappers for parts of the back-end functionality which we use for test purposes.

When starting AS5, actually two processes are started: avrstudio.exe which is the front-end IDE, and avrdbg.exe which is the backend. The latter is cross-platform and we do build native Linux versions of it internally.

The actual debugging and programming functionality for all tools (simulator, emulators, STKs) resides in the backend.

I cannot say when and how much of this will be released. What is certain is that we need to get the backend SDK in place first.

Quote:

EDIT: Or do you mean the actual backend binaries? In that case, if it really is multiplatform, the same way the toolchain works - just recompile it.

Not quite. The backend code is not and will not be open source, so we will have to build and distribute it for the platforms we want to support (currently Linux and possibly MacOS X).

- roland

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

> The backend code is not and will not be open source,
> so we will have to build and distribute it for the platforms
> we want to support (currently Linux and possibly MacOS X).

Well, that would be certainly at least better than what's around there
right now, even though it leaves some people out (like those running
other OSes, e.g. Solaris, or Linux on different architectures than
x86). If this is released in a relatively timely fashion (and be it
even "beta" quality only), I could imagine that some kind of
community-effort initiative could establish a some-platform (as
opposed to true multi-platform ;-) alternative frontend around it,
e.g. based on Eclipse. This, in turn, would take some of the pressure
off Atmel Norway to have a fully-supported multi-platform solution
(which I assume is simply not doable due to lack of resources, given
the way that has been walked along with the current AVR Studio 5).

Jörg Wunsch

Please don't send me PMs, use email if you want to approach me personally.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

I haven't downloaded the Beta yet. I am inclined to wait a version or two...

That said, I wondered it AS5 and the Dragon can now program Xmegas, using the PDI interface, without crashing?

I don't know enough about the inner workings to know if the problem was in AS4, or in the Dragon's firmware, to know if AS5 has resolved this issue.

JC

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

> It's based on Visual Studio 10, .NET Framework 4,
> SQL Server CLR. So much for that Eclipse rumor.

UghHH!!! That's enough to make me squirm. Please tell me this wont mean my PC is trying to call home to Microsoft for 50 updates a week and need to have me prove to them again that my OEM Windows license is actually valid. What a major disappointment to hear this.

Pages