Install AVR32 Tool Chain on Ubuntu Edgy

Go To Last Post
7 posts / 0 new
Author
Message
#1
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

Hi,
i tried to install the tool chain on Ubuntu Edgy (Kubuntu 6.10), but the installation fails. I need libxerces27, but I could'nt install it.

How can I bring the tool chain to run with Edgy?

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

hmm... It should be found in the repositories....

What do you get when you try the following?

sudo apt-get update && sudo apt-cache search libxerces

11011110101011011100000011011110

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

Burli;
I have just been through this (it took me days...), but I can give you some pointers:

in /etc/apt/ edit (as su) sources.list, and remove the comment symbols from those which are commented out (along with adding "deb http://www.atmel.no/beta_ware/av... binary/". To be honest, I remember that there are six such lines, and I don't know which is the salient line for this issue: I just un-commented them all. This will give you access to enough to get that package.

I found number of additional problems; use (in x-windows) "/System/Administration/Synaptic Package Manager" to make sure you have flex, autoconf, and bison, if you want to compile the file system (for either the STK1000, or the NGW100).

There is more, but I may need a trigger from a question from you to remember it....

JimT[/b]

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

krangnes said:

Quote:

hmm... It should be found in the repositories....

What do you get when you try the following?

sudo apt-get update && sudo apt-cache search libxerces

In the last few daze of trying to make a new file system (starting from installing Ubuntu 6.10 Desktop), I have noticed that there are is a lot of similar advice (i.e., "it should be ok, but try this"), but fails (meaning no disrespect) to account for the fact that the advisor (who, no doubt, has a fully configured and working system) had a different configuration (perhaps, as in my case, a brand new one, default in every (salient) way). So far, I have encountered two major problems, but spent (as I said) days resolving them. The first, as mentioned above, and the second, that usb-to-SDcard drivers are not up to snuff (VMWare's are the most problematic, but Linux's are not perfect, either).

I point this out, not to chide, but in the hope that advisors such as yourself will consider not just the immediate question, but the entire chain of requirments for the particular issue.

Having said all that, I think it important to note that you, and squidgit, and a few others are responsable for that fact that I can build the entire file system for my stk1000, and can proceed with modification to said file system! Thanks!

JimT

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

Daddo wrote:
I point this out, not to chide, but in the hope that advisors such as yourself will consider not just the immediate question, but the entire chain of requirments for the particular issue.
Glad you appreciate the help, happy to give it :).

Personally, I tend to like stepping through a problem piece by piece. If I, as you suggest, try and consider the entire chain of requirements I inevitably leave bits out and we end up in an even larger mess.

I guess what it comes down to is

Daddo wrote:
but fails ... to account for the fact that the advisor ... had a different configuration

We know we have a different config, most of our questions are trying to find out _what_ that difference is so we can customize our responses a bit. Without that all we can do is give the "Well I did..." and "I just worked when..." stuff. YMMV.

In the case of this problem, it seems to boil down to not being able to install libxerces which _is_ present in one of the Ubuntu repositories somewhere. The step Krangnes asked you to try simply tests whether libxerces is in a repository which is currently enabled. If that test were to come out negative he (or myself) would then tell you how to enable the repositories which may contain it.

As it works out, you found out that bit yourself so we didn't have to tell you ourselves. Kudos!

-S.

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

For the record, Burli was the one with the problem (not that I didn't have it, just that I got past it, was sharing my experience, and making a suggestion).

you said:

Quote:

If I, as you suggest, try and consider the entire chain of requirements I inevitably leave bits out and we end up in an even larger mess.

Fair enough; I'll have to consider that as a consequence. On the other hand, it implies that I made a mistake of leaping to a conclusion, and offering a solution for the problem which might not be correct. One must then wonder where the balance is. I based my answer on my own experience, as well as solution gleaned from other threads on this very issue, like https://www.avrfreaks.net/index.p..., which reference precisely this problem.

Simply on the basis of what Burli wrote, I, too, concluded that the problem was that he did not have full access to the repositories, and gave him a solution which worked for me. Do you think I should have taken a more measured approach, and waited for his answer to krangnes?

Quote:

As it works out, you found out that bit yourself so we didn't have to tell you ourselves. Kudos!

Well, my point (at least partially) is that you (as well as others) did tell me, in a round-about way, in those other threads, and I was trying to give Burli that short-cut. At the same time, I was asking that those who can provide background do so, since I always find that context (even when tediously repeated) helps my understanding of the process. As someone on these forums recently pointed out, the linux noobs such as myself take the lack of documentation less as a challenge, and more as an impediment. So, if this background context had been provided in, say, https://www.avrfreaks.net/index.p..., I could have saved about two of those days (not a complaint, just an observation).

JimT

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

Daddo wrote:
For the record, Burli was the one with the problem (not that I didn't have it, just that I got past it, was sharing my experience, and making a suggestion).
Truth, mia culpa ;)
Daddo wrote:
Fair enough; I'll have to consider that as a consequence. On the other hand, it implies that I made a mistake of leaping to a conclusion, and offering a solution for the problem which might not be correct.
I was speaking for myself, just the way I like to do things, no right or wrong etc.
Daddo wrote:
Simply on the basis of what Burli wrote, I, too, concluded that the problem was that he did not have full access to the repositories, and gave him a solution which worked for me.
And that's great, you had the exact problem, you recognized the problem more quickly and precisely than myself (and I suppose Krangnes though I don't like to speak for him ;) ), you offered that solution, I don't really see an issue here. I'm sure everyone is thankful for your response, there isn't any monopoly on help on a forum such as this!
Daddo wrote:
As someone on these forums recently pointed out, the linux noobs such as myself take the lack of documentation less as a challenge, and more as an impediment. So, if this background context had been provided in, say, https://www.avrfreaks.net/index.p..., I could have saved about two of those days (not a complaint, just an observation).
Good point well taken, shall keep it in mind for future posts :). Always happy to get feedback on my feedback ;)

-S.