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

jkuusama wrote:
Minor issue: AS5 does not remember its settings, it always opens full screen. Ok, it is only one click and drag. Otherwise I'm liking it more and more.

That's a problem with the shortcut (both desktop and the Programs menu), it is configured to launch the IDE in a maximized view. If you want to workaround it Right click the shortcut and select Normal Window (It will be now maximized). Then it will remember your preferences.

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

Trym wrote:
Quote:

Another restart, try AS5 and same error. Reinstall AS5 and still no luck.......

Could you send us a mail on avrbeta@atmel.com and we will try to help you out.

Lars K

I did as requested, never got any help. Finally thru process monitor and dependency walker found a bad dll file on my system. Would have been much easier had I though to run system file checker first... So if anyone gets the problem of AS5 wont run and you get an error that Microsoft visual studio shell isolated is missing or can not find a component, please reinstall. Just run SFC /scannow

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

ArnoldB wrote:

Quote:
You haven' checked the release notes, have you? The ATMega8 is officially not supported by AS5 with a Dragon.
Indeed. My Bad. Was too eager to download (after registering again) the package.
Releasenotes can be found here:http://www.atmel.com/dyn/products/tools_card.asp?tool_id=17212

But I do hope that AS5 final release will have support for ATmega8 and others.

edit: 2 typo's

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

Last Edited: Wed. Mar 9, 2011 - 05:26 PM
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

Quote:

Releasenotes can be found here:http://www.atmel.com/dyn/product...

OK, where they there from the start? If so I apologize for any sour remarks about Atmels inability to supply such w/o a download of the whole package being necessary. (I just have an grinding memory that they weren't, and I have been sober for a full month with one exception and at that occasion the computer wasn't out of the backpack.. :wink:)

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

I am not sure, Johan.
Like Chuck, I have a teflon coated memory bank ;)

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

js wrote:
Shaking your head may cause brain damage. :-)

So it is official, AS5 affects your health.

JohanEkdahl wrote:
OK, where they there from the start?

Yes. The original one I got from Atmel's web mess still had a "for Atmel employees only" remark, and was quickly replaced by the current one.

Stealing Proteus doesn't make you an engineer.

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

OK, good on them then. And my apologies in this instance.

Now let's hope they always do this. Next to any software download should be a link to release notes readable w/o having to /l the whole package.

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

Did the SKT500 went to the archives?

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

jeroen3 wrote:
Did the SKT500 went to the archives?
No. It's not supported in *this* beta but will be supported in the final release.

For the time being, keep AVRStudio4 on your system. It can "live" next to AVRStudio5 on your PC.

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

I'm getting these errors after importing a project into AVR_S5
Any Ideas

Attachment(s): 

_________________________________

www.proficnc.com
_________________________________
Go Aussie Go!!!

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

What happened to Atmel? This AVR Studio 5 should be scrapped. How do you expect this stuff to be installed on a PC in a manufacturing environment?

Am I supposed to use this as a programming tool or as part of a programming tool?

I can't even get this stuff installed on a Work PC. Which means I won't be using Atmel anymore.

5 THUMBS DOWN.

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

I think AVR STudio 5 works great already as a beta despite the missing debug functionality for STK500 (programming with STK500 was easily solved)

My advice to everyone looking for a smooth install of the beta is to first update your computer with the latest version of dotnet runtime either throug Windows update or direct download from Microsoft.
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/en/details.aspx?FamilyID=9cfb2d51-5ff4-4491-b0e5-b386f32c0992

Visual Studio is a great IDE and AVR development on Windows just took a giant leap forward in productivity!

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

But a stand-alone programming software is a must. I, too, can't see this on a factory floor.

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

proficnc wrote:
I'm getting these errors after importing a project into AVR_S5
Any Ideas

Can you paste/attach the output in the Output window?

Does changing the tool chain to WinAVR (http://avrstudio5.wordpress.com/...) help?

Regards

Senthil

 

blog | website

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

yep, changed it to WinAVR-20100110
Works well.

Thanks

_________________________________

www.proficnc.com
_________________________________
Go Aussie Go!!!

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0
Visual Studio is a great IDE and AVR development on Windows just took a giant leap forward in productivity!

Bullshit!
Am I allowed to say bullshit?
Visual Studio, like every other M$ product, is slow, bloated, and prone to repeated crashes throughout the day.
Been using it at work (every version since about the year dot) for 'Windoze' based apps, and mostly, I want to kill myself at the end of the day. :(

--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

gregsmithcts wrote:

Visual Studio is a great IDE and AVR development on Windows just took a giant leap forward in productivity!

Bullshit!
Am I allowed to say bullshit?
Visual Studio, like every other M$ product, is slow, bloated, and prone to repeated crashes throughout the day.
Been using it at work (every version since about the year dot) for 'Windoze' based apps, and mostly, I want to kill myself at the end of the day. :(

Sure you are allowed to say Bullshit! But as a user of C# .NET I have to ask, what system allows equivalent productivity with fewer problems? I've been asking this question for years and I usually get a list of every other system out there and I've yet to find anything that seems likely to improve my productivity enough to warrant the extra learning curve. Right now I'm leaning to Code::Blocks to do a project that I could mostly do in C#, but this is the first package that I've heard about that seem like they will do the job I want, is easy to learn, and the benefit that makes it worth learning is that it runs on several OS.

What system do you think would make you more productive than the one you are using?

Smiley

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

gregsmithcts wrote:
Quote:
Visual Studio is a great IDE and AVR development on Windows just took a giant leap forward in productivity!

Bullshit!
Am I allowed to say bullshit?
Visual Studio, like every other M$ product, is slow, bloated, and prone to repeated crashes throughout the day.

And there are also at least two more questions that need to be asked:

1) How much productivity reserve is there actually in the development of short little AVR applications that barely fill 8k, 32k or maybe 256k of flash? Even the slowest typist can type up a program to fill an AVR in no time. So it can't be saving keystrokes. The most work is in thinking about the application. Are the Microsoft fanboys claiming the IDE is now thinking for you?

2) How unproductive must someone be that he feels that Studio 5 abomination is in any way a productivity improvement?

Stealing Proteus doesn't make you an engineer.

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

Sounds like most people are not in the mood to get used to something a little different. I find Studio 5 to a little more clunky when it comes to programming the flash on the avr. The IDE is most certainly nicer in regards to formatting. Studio 5 is not purely just for the little 8 bit mcu's, rather the entire product line of embedded computers. What seems like overkill for an AVR 8 bit might not be such an overkill for the newer mcu's

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

If the premise is to provide a nice development environment on Windows only for the least amount of effort, then I can not find much fault with Visual Studio. Yes it is a heavy piece of software, but most modern pieces are.

Of course, this premise ignores the vocal feedback of the users here.

Markus

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

The sad thing is the underlying Studio 5 .NET software checks for genuine Windows OS, therefore it actually anti-multiple platform. It is not just using Windows that is the problem, but this is like a rat trap where M$ sells you the cheese then if you purchase it, the rat trap closes on the victim customer who gets locked into a high cost of ownership proprietary OS.

This is not like ATMEL just ignored all the requests for multiple platform, they actually choose a provider that blocks multiple platform choices on the IDE. A real FU type of response.

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

soundararajan wrote:
LDEVRIES wrote:
Well I thought I would jump in and at least see for myself what it's about. It has taken over 12 hours to download (I pushed a few Z's during that time).
So I clicked on the beautiful icon and was greeted with
Quote:
Error Code: -5001 : 0x80070002
Error Information:
>SetupNew\setup.cpp (142)
PAPP:
PVENDOR:
PGUID:
$
@Windows 7 / Server 2008 R2 Service Pack 0 (7600)
IE Version: 8.0.7600.16385

Quote:
Problem signature:
Problem Event Name: APPCRASH
Application Name: avrstudio5.0.beta.exe
Application Version: 16.0.0.435
Application Timestamp: 4b58d5d1
Fault Module Name: avrstudio5.0.beta.exe
Fault Module Version: 16.0.0.435
Fault Module Timestamp: 4b58d5d1
Exception Code: c0000005
Exception Offset: 0003c3e7
OS Version: 6.1.7600.2.0.0.768.3
Locale ID: 3081
Additional Information 1: 507f
Additional Information 2: 507ff6a235784f5d73455424b8ec18db
Additional Information 3: 49e3
Additional Information 4: 49e38fef9721535bd2c49b230690cad2

So there is some feedback from a Beta tester! wtf?
This looks like an Illuminati conspiracy.

What operating system are you using , is it windows 7 or Windows server 2008 R2. If Windows 7 please suggest the flavour (home/professional/enterprise)?

Hi soundararajan,

I have the exact same problem as LDEVRIES. I downloaded the avr studio 5 beta setup yesterday and crashed on Windows 7 sp1 ultimate edition. I tried it also on Win Xp sp3 (Virtual Machine) and had the exact result. I don't think it's an issue of OS version.

Problem Fixed: I re downloaded the setup file and it worked on both win 7 and win xp. It seems that my first setup file was corrupted.

Last Edited: Sun. Mar 13, 2011 - 01:07 PM
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

wjh308 wrote:
Sounds like most people are not in the mood to get used to something a little different.

You haven't got it. Like so many experienced programmers and software developers I don't need yet another stinking IDE. I carry my favorite editor around for decades. That covers the code-cutting, thank you very much. No need for a stinking fancy "state of the art" IDE that does a hundred pointless things I just don't need.

What I need is the ability to mix and match tools to get what is best for me, not what some Microsoft boot-lickers think is best for the world. From Atmel I need AVR specific tools I can integrate into my setup, on the platforms I prefer, not on the platform Atmel dictates. These tools are:

- Debugger ICE/OCD

[- Programming software (dude is good enough here)]

- Tool firmware updating software

Others might need

- Simulator

- Fuse calculator

and a few more toys, too.

These tools must not be tight into a big fat IDE I don't want and don't need.

Of course, Atmel is free to build a junk IDE. I would normally not care, if they would not neglect my needs. Neglecting them by not providing the tools I need in the form I need them, where I need them. And by not even providing the necessary information (e.g. the complete debugging protocol on USB between an ICE and a PC) that would enable others to build them.

What Atmel instead did is to tie themselves and their tools to at least three - yes, three - frameworks.

Framework 1:

These geniuses picked .NET 4.0. That thing alone is larger than some operating systems. One would think that is good enough to build a stinking IDE.

It is filled to the brim with "technologies", doing all kinds of fancy things, people could also do twenty years ago. But then with only a tenth of the code in half the time. But well, modern times.

Framework 2:

The .NET 4.0 framework wasn't enough for the Atmel geniuses. They also selected an application specific framework, VS Isolated Shell, to make really sure they have enough code to inherit to build a bloody editor and some tools.

Framework 3:

You'd think with two frameworks they'd already be happy?

No, to make really, really sure they really, really inherit even more code, they also added the Open Service Platform framework.

Here it gets really surreal. Someone must have really gotten a hard one adding that into the mix, too. It is a C++ framework, faking Java OSGi features for C++. Hell, doesn't the stinking .NET have enough features for dynamically loading, binding and execution code? Doesn't even naked Windows have enough of these features? Nooo, at least not for the Atmel guys.

I mean, are you kidding me?

Now, ask yourself, why is Studio at least one year delayed? Ask yourself, why does it still have all these, hmm, "interesting" bugs, after 1000+ internal builds and test runs? Why are essential features ommitted?

Three frameworks, which all need to be understood and handled, which all have their own quirks and bugs, with overlapping functions, with interfaces not quite matching, requiring a boatload of glue code, might be the answer.

PS: Did I say three frameworks? Well, make that three and a half

Framework 3.5:

OSP is itself build on the POCO framework.

Stealing Proteus doesn't make you an engineer.

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

gregsmithcts wrote:
Visual Studio, like every other M$ product, is slow, bloated, and prone to repeated crashes throughout the day.

I remember hearing the same thing about Eclipse when it was new, big and bloated, took ages to load, used upp all the free memory of your computer and it was using this runtime thing called Java, not even a "real" program!
gregsmithcts wrote:
Been using it at work (every version since about the year dot) for 'Windoze' based apps, and mostly, I want to kill myself at the end of the day. :(

I think there is a lot of religion in the question wheter one likes Visual Studio and its derrivatives or not. To me AVR development on Windows got a lot better with VS5 and people who don´t like it can still use avr-GCC+Eclipse+gdb, nothing got worse.

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

swesysmgr wrote:
... and people who don´t like it can still use avr-GCC+Eclipse+gdb, nothing got worse.

That is exactly where the problem is ! Yes we can if we do everything ourselves. Can you show me how Atmel supports the use of avr-GCC+Eclipse+gdb ?

They don't, that's why we are all up in arms. We have to reverse-engineer the Atmel stuff first, because they refuse to divulge the appropriate interfaces and, in violation of the GPL do not distribute the patched source of the gcc toolchain they are distributing.

Markus

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

Fair should be fair, so I'll toss in my experiences with Microsoft software:

Quote:

Visual Studio, like every other M$ product, is [...] prone to repeated crashes throughout the day.
Been using it at work (every version since about the year dot) for 'Windoze' based apps, and mostly, I want to kill myself at the end of the day. Sad

I uses Visual Studio at work daily, and have been doing so since Visual Studio 6 around 1995. Yes, there has been the odd unstable version, but I really have to think hard to remember when it last crashed on me. (Main headache right now is using the ClearCase plugin and disconnecting from the network makes things stall to a halt, but that prolly should be blamed on IBM/Rational).

Same for Word and Excel: I hate the new UI in Office 2008 but can't remember when they last crashed. I am a vivid user of OpenOffice at home, and it was not long ago that it crashed repeatedly in my face (around version 2.0 IIRC).

Quote:

I think there is a lot of religion in the question wheter one likes Visual Studio and its derrivatives or not. To me AVR development on Windows got a lot better with VS5 and people who don´t like it can still use avr-GCC+Eclipse+gdb, nothing got worse.

No, and that is why we are disappointed. "Nothing got wors" might be true, but it is also true that "nothing got better". It might if Atmel released the debug interfaces, or built a debug module for other platforms too. It has been revealed here that the debug module in AS5 is actually designed to be cross platform. Will Atmel ever release it? I doubt it since they have already shown with utmost clarity that they are not interested in other platforms than Windows. I'd like to be proven wrong, but am definitively not holding my breath. (And even if they are planning for this, consider the possible timeframe. It took them an overshoot of a full year to get this beta out. I'd expect at least six more months befor Atmel can face themselves in the mirror and saying "this is AS5, official release".)

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

I second Johan in many parts. The 'crashes all the time' thing for Microsoft software comes from its Windows95 history. Since about Windows 2000 I can not claim any extraordinary tendency to crash, it's become stable like most other software too. Also, the user interface is quite pleasant and coherent, maybe not as streamlines as Apples, but in general better than Linux. Like Johan, I hate Office 2008, this ribbon business is just a mess. It works well for a stupid user who does not knows what he does, but for us engineers it is a complete loss.

For the 'nothing got worse' thing I disagree. You could make work Studio 4 in Wine or ina small VirtualBox. This is definitely out the window now and will not come back. As any Atmel support for open source seems to be lip service or wishful thinking only I think it got worse. Just look at the lack of straightforward commends by Atmel people in the Forum here. We only get weasel-words at best even though they all read it and are aware of it.

Don't fault the engineers, they are probably all suffering from this too, but clearly Atmel management has decided not to care.

Markus

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

Today I found the time to d/l and give it a spin. I personally felt comfortable, but then I work with Visual Studio on a daily basis. Just threw up a blinky and ran it in the simulator. Then started to explore the stuff in menus and windows.

1: Now, did I miss it, or can you not see I/O registers during simulating?

(Release notes contains "register" three times, non that has anything to do with this.
This thread contains does not contain "register" in the context of "I/O register" neither.)

No, I can not watch registers in the watch window either.

2: What on earth is "Find references" doing in the Refactor sub-menu? :shock:

3: For both the Refactor and Surround with menus, the menu names have "VA X" appended (i.e. so its "Refactor VA X"). What is this? Just a plain bug, or some half-finished feature?

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

The Atmel web site doesn't actually mention anywhere that it is beta software! One doesn't find that out until one is on the download page.

Leon Heller G1HSM

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

JohanEkdahl wrote:
1: Now, did I miss it, or can you not see I/O registers during simulating?

Debug->Windows-I/O view, shows up in the small window to the right, tabbed with the solution.

I managed to make the simulator look for source from "C:\home\tools\hudson\workspace\" which is definitely not my machine but it´s a beta so I can live with it :)

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

JohanEkdahl wrote:
3: For both the Refactor and Surround with menus, the menu names have "VA X" appended (i.e. so its "Refactor VA X"). What is this? Just a plain bug, or some half-finished feature?

You´re talking about the right-click context menus right? I think it´s becuse the menus call the Visual Assist X "surround with" function, you also have a Intellisense "surround with".

If you turn of the Visual Assit X plugin in the VAssistX menu the right-click contect menu will show the Intellisense "surround with" instead.

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

Quote:

The Atmel web site doesn't actually mention anywhere that it is beta software!

Where are you looking, Leon? If I click the link in Deans very first post in this thread, and then follow the link Atmel AVR Studio 5 (under the Downloads heading on that page) I come to a page that has a blue heading saying AVR Studio 5 beta:

Attachment(s): 

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

I was referring to the main Atmel web page:

http://www2.atmel.com/

Neither that, nor the page one gets when one clicks on it:

http://www.atmel.com/microsite/a...

mentions that it is a beta release. It's not mentioned until one gets to the download page:

http://www.atmel.com/dyn/product...

It warns against using it for "mission critical projects", which is wise.

Leon Heller G1HSM

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

markus_b wrote:
We have to reverse-engineer the Atmel stuff first, because they refuse to divulge the appropriate interfaces and, in violation of the GPL do not distribute the patched source of the gcc toolchain they are distributing.
Where did you get this? If true it is major, so can you point to the evidence?

Smiley

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

They might not state formally that the code is available, but will probably supply it to anyone requesting a copy. That should satisfy the GPL requirements.

Leon Heller G1HSM

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

swesysmgr wrote:
people who don´t like it can still use avr-GCC+Eclipse+gdb, nothing got worse.

Wrong.

- Updating programmer and debugger firmware got worse

- Access to programmer and debugger help / documentation got worse

- Access to ASF got worse (ok, arguable if this isn't a good thing)

- Access to part description files got worse

- Support for new devices got worse

And all we get from Atmel people and their minions here, are taunts we should shut up an join the program.

Stealing Proteus doesn't make you an engineer.

Last Edited: Sun. Mar 13, 2011 - 07:05 PM
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

leon_heller wrote:
They might not state formally that the code is available, but will probably supply it to anyone requesting a copy. That should satisfy the GPL requirements.

No it does not. Read about the "written offer" part of the GPL.

Stealing Proteus doesn't make you an engineer.

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

smileymicros wrote:
markus_b wrote:
We have to reverse-engineer the Atmel stuff first, because they refuse to divulge the appropriate interfaces and, in violation of the GPL do not distribute the patched source of the gcc toolchain they are distributing.
Where did you get this? If true it is major, so can you point to the evidence?

Smiley

The source code for the latest winavr (gcc) toolchain is not published. Atmel distributes it as part of the Studio 5 beta and is legally required to distribute it source. It seems that it does not even ship the GPL license with Studio 5.

Does the Studio 5 beta distribution contains gcc ? -> Yes

Does Atmel makes the source code available ? -> No

Edit: http://distribute.atmel.no/tools/opensource/avr-gcc/ does have source for gcc 4.4.3. The gcc in Studio 5 is based on gcc 4.5.1, there is no source for that.

Markus

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

ArnoldB wrote:
leon_heller wrote:
They might not state formally that the code is available, but will probably supply it to anyone requesting a copy. That should satisfy the GPL requirements.

No it does not. Read about the "written offer" part of the GPL.

I see what you mean. I don't think that Microchip actually makes a written offer like that, either, but the source code is available on their web site.

Leon Heller G1HSM

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

markus_b wrote:
The source code for the latest winavr (gcc) toolchain is not published. Atmel distributes it as part of the Studio 5 beta and is legally required to distribute it source. It seems that it does not even ship the GPL license with Studio 5.
I'm not trying to be difficult, but it is important for me to understand this. You are saying that there exists a newer version of WinAVR that is not part of the WinAVR open source project, but is proprietary to Atmel and that they are using this for AS5 and not releasing the source code. Correct? To save me some time can you provide your reasons for thinking this? Are you saying that AS5 had included in it a version of WinAVR not available for download from the WinAVR sourceforge project?

Smiley

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

smileymicros wrote:
markus_b wrote:
The source code for the latest winavr (gcc) toolchain is not published. Atmel distributes it as part of the Studio 5 beta and is legally required to distribute it source. It seems that it does not even ship the GPL license with Studio 5.
I'm not trying to be difficult, but it is important for me to understand this. You are saying that there exists a newer version of WinAVR that is not part of the WinAVR open source project, but is proprietary to Atmel and that they are using this for AS5 and not releasing the source code. Correct? To save me some time can you provide your reasons for thinking this? Are you saying that AS5 had included in it a version of WinAVR not available for download from the WinAVR sourceforge project?

Smiley

Markus is only mistaken in calling it WinAVR. It's called AVR Toolchain and the source to compile that version isn't available.

C:\Program Files (x86)\Atmel\AVR Studio 5.0\extensions\Application\AVR Toolchain\bin>avr-gcc --version
avr-gcc (AVR_8_bit_GNU_Toolchain_3.2.0_253) 4.5.1
Copyright (C) 2010 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
This is free software; see the source for copying conditions.  There is NO
warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
C:\Program Files (x86)\Atmel\AVR Tools\AVR Toolchain\bin>avr-gcc --version
avr-gcc (AVR_Toolchain_3.0_201007081300) 4.4.3
Copyright (C) 2010 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
This is free software; see the source for copying conditions.  There is NO
warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

So is the AVR Toolchain a proprietary fork of WinAVR? If so, considering the WinAVR license IIRC is BSD then what would be the problem?

Does anybody have any reason to suspect that they are modifying avr-gcc (which IIRC is GNU licensed) and keeping those mods proprietary? That would be a problem.

I guess I'm confused about the licensing issues. It seems to me that WinAVR has an open license that would allow anybody to take a copy of it and use it however they like without any obligation to release any mods. But avr-gcc IIRC does have a restrictive license that requires release of any code that uses it. I wonder if that license would require you to release the source code of a program that merely calls the avr-gcc executable?

I'd just like some clarity before we start accusing Atmel of violating open software licenses.

Smiley

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

smileymicros wrote:
Does anybody have any reason to suspect that they are modifying avr-gcc (which IIRC is GNU licensed) and keeping those mods proprietary? That would be a problem.
...

I'd just like some clarity before we start accusing Atmel of violating open software licenses.

Smiley

This is exactly what they are doing. WinAVR really doesn't have anything to do with it. The source to gcc and the source to binutils have been modified. The source modifications need to be distributed also.

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

Ok, let's see if I can help clarify this.

WinAVR is nothing more than a pre-built collection of various open source packages. Each of those packages has has a different license. Some packages have a GPL (GNU Public License) license (e.g. Binutils, GCC, GDB), and some packages have a BSD license (e.g. avr-libc).

WinAVR has always been available from the SourceForge website exclusively. WinAVR is not shipped with AVR Studio 5.

AVR Studio 5 includes the "AVR Toolchain", which is a separate collection of many of the same open source tools, and it comes directly from Atmel.

I need to know: Has anyone here formally requested the patches (for GPL licensed packages) from Atmel by contacting them at avr@atmel.com?

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

There is no attempt from Atmel to hide the source code for the GNU Toolchain.

WinAVR installs the source code patches in a source folder when you install it. So does the windows installer for the latest official AVR Toolchain also (Found here http://www.atmel.com/dyn/product...).

We will do that also for future releases of AVR Toolchain.

AVR Studio 5 is still in beta. I see that there is some options regarding GPL and when to release the patches for GNU Toolchain related to that. Our opinion is that we could wait until official release of AVR Studio 5 to release those patches. Reason being that they change from day to day and releasing them before they are stable will create some currently unwanted distraction from the main product (AVR Studio 5) and that will delay our current schedule. We hope you can understand that?

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

pab wrote:
There is no attempt from Atmel to hide the source code for the GNU Toolchain.

But it does.
pab wrote:
WinAVR installs the source code patches in a source folder when you install it. So does the windows installer for the latest official AVR Toolchain also (Found here http://www.atmel.com/dyn/product...).

We will do that also for future releases of AVR Toolchain.


Fine, why not for the betas ?

It is couple of additional lines in your build script.

pab wrote:
AVR Studio 5 is still in beta. I see that there is some options regarding GPL and when to release the patches for GNU Toolchain related to that. Our opinion is that we could wait until official release of AVR Studio 5 to release those patches. Reason being that they change from day to day and releasing them before they are stable will create some currently unwanted distraction from the main product (AVR Studio 5) and that will delay our current schedule. We hope you can understand that?

I can understand that you don't want to put up the effort. But the consequence is that the work to provide a cross-platform version can only start after you open the source. All other platforms will be late because of this. In addition I understand you are in violation of the License. If the delta time would be a week I would not care, but it is months or years.

Can you understand that we cross platform people are pissed ?

Markus

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

Thank you all for providing input to how we manage this, we'll see if we cannot satisfy you. More betas are coming. Please await the next round to see what we managed to provide for you.

And as Eric said:

Quote:
Has anyone here formally requested the patches (for GPL licensed packages) from Atmel by contacting them at avr@atmel.com?

Until we have this running smoothly, please use the above address and our happy AVR-vikings will serve you in this also :)

Just out of curiosity marcus_b: What are you making a cross platform version of since this delays you?

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

Quote:

What are you making a cross platform version of since this delays you?

Can't speak for Markus but there was already someone looking for Tiny4313 support on Linux. The "AVR Toolchain" in AS5 has this support. If the patches that were used to make that version of "toolchain" were identified/published then the Linux toolchain builders would be able to make a Linux based equivalent of the Toolchain that is in AS5.

By not publishing (even if it is a beta) you are appearing to kick the Linux users twice - first by apparently going out of you way to tie the "great new IDE" to Windows alone and then by not even making it possible for Linux users to even get the same device support from the toolchain. It may not be the case but to external observers this starts to look like deliberate anti-Linux action. Given that users of Linux are also those who tend to believe fervently in the GPL your apparent non-GPL compliance is just making things worse again.

No one can tell you what to do but surely it would only take about one day of engineering time for the toolchain builder to identify which patches were applied (presumably there's a build script that did this all automatically?) and simply list the names or, better, the URLs for them so that Linux package maintainers can produce the Linux x86 equivalent binaries.

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

OKB wrote:
Just out of curiosity marcus_b: What are you making a cross platform version of since this delays you?

Cliff has guessed right. It is not my projects I have a problem with directly, but with there being no timely support for the toolchain. I don't care for the IDE much, as there are alternatives.

But the toolchain and some auxiliary stuff like updating the firmware of the programming tools are pretty essential. For example updating the firmware of the stk500 or dragon was already a pain, because you had to install studio in a VM just for this. It was bearable because one has simple XP VM's lying around. But with Studio5 it will be a real pain, because of the net / visual studio you'll spend days downloading microsoft service packs and fixes just to update a Dragon firmware !

Ideally I would see Atmel developing the *toolchain* and some essential utilities out in the open, on a site like savannah / sourceforge / github, whatever. Atmel just does the windows part, would to Linux/OsX/BSD.

What you provide for your Windows customers is fine, I have no problem with that. It is the omission of all others. In the light of the 'wishlist' more than a year ago, where 'cross platform' was the single requirement standing out, I find that quite astonishing. Also, the complete blackout of all information and the competitors coming out with cross-platform support did not help. I installed the code red IDE for Linux from NXP the week before the beta was announced...

Markus

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

AVR studio 5 beta is nice.(new IDE features)
AVR studio 5 beta is slow if i compare it with AVR studio 4
AVR studio 5 beta is FAT
WinAVR4:16mb/172mb vs WinAVR5:installer+.NET is 3x or 3.5x larger :(

Old toolchain + Eclipse is lighter i think.
Wine/Mono compatible ? if not its fail.

PS: Embedded programming require so big resources ? to produce few kb code i need now nearly gigabyte of memory.

I will wait on non beta release and use older WinAVR4 :(

its my opinion I hope Atmell will also support lighter or PortableApps version!

Pages