X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f X-Recipient: geda-user AT delorie DOT com DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Sponydm4boR0mKBTaHC5U+7CIHVQXmOMz8obRnKBsrE=; b=HJHkee98feNpcfiRK1t3Fw8zFLRwU6l+8vwa+jfCZZ/QBFMgrhfpeevgG9J86UtfeC PNqqxpw3MtsRGNfEZ2ZzQUvg9mgCuWRyDw0zxu/8tWv8f5Fpzz/AjbD7IHsCCiKV9wqi I9EX7JOE/l/QX0HypWxaMz2iCMQ3i4295pnlk= MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <4EDA4BF9.7080904@neurotica.com> References: <4EC9CE99 DOT 5040303 AT industromatic DOT com> <4ED27309 DOT 6030100 AT ecosensory DOT com> <20111127231842 DOT 3FD9B81F6262 AT turkos DOT aspodata DOT se> <4ED30BB2 DOT 8030301 AT ecosensory DOT com> <20111128075947 DOT F0D6681F6266 AT turkos DOT aspodata DOT se> <4ED36081 DOT 5080507 AT ecosensory DOT com> <20111202101147 DOT 04de74dd DOT attila AT kinali DOT ch> <9E8604A1-E961-43F6-91C9-A5E4C1719248 AT noqsi DOT com> <4EDA4BF9 DOT 7080904 AT neurotica DOT com> Date: Sat, 3 Dec 2011 11:47:28 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [geda-user] Re: I won't do BGA's From: Bob Paddock To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by delorie.com id pB3GlWXR021487 Reply-To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com X-Mailing-List: geda-user AT delorie DOT com X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com Precedence: bulk On Sat, Dec 3, 2011 at 11:19 AM, Dave McGuire wrote: >  Please forgive me for jumping in, but I was just handed responsibility for > a biggish project at work that is AVR-based.  I'm primarily an ARM and mcs51 > guy, and this was my first exposure to AVR. So far so good; I'm enjoying it. Have no real complants about the chips, other than wishing they'd fix the known bugs in them. They rarely do that. My complaints are with Atmel. >  About the GCC support having been good in the past...I build all of my own > GCC cross compilation toolchains, because most of the pre-built ones I've > found out there have disappointed me at one time or another. I'm currently > at 4.4.6.  The AVR support in that release seems to be just fine.  Is there > some point in a later release where things are suboptimal? Something to do with changes in internal register allocation changes of GCC, as far as the AVR was concerned. 4.3.4 is still the official recommended version. Jörg wants people to test the 4.6.x stuff. I'd skip anything in 4.4 and 4.5. Bingo's conical build script is here: http://www.avrfreaks.net/index.php?name=PNphpBB2&file=viewtopic&t=42631&postdays=0&postorder=asc Unless you have a very new part that is not supported, there is not a lot of reason to use the newer stuff for the AVR. Do make sure you are up to date on all of the patches, and using the latest version of AVR-LibC. 1.7.0 had all of the delay functions broken. I document a particularly nasty problem with the XMega here: http://blog.softwaresafety.net/2011/02/anatomy-of-race-condition-toyota-vs-avr.html >  Heh.  I'd quit. ;) I've thought of it. Even thought of going out on my own, problem is I don't know how to answer the question "Where are your customers going to come from?". > Dave McGuire > New Kensington, PA Thought you where in Florida? Your only about 70 miles from me now. -- http://blog.softwaresafety.net/ http://www.designer-iii.com/ http://www.wearablesmartsensors.com/