gnupic: Re: [gnupic] gputils-0.13.4


Previous by date: 24 Aug 2006 02:41:54 +0100 Re: [gnupic] differences in lcall macros, Craig Franklin
Next by date: 24 Aug 2006 02:41:54 +0100 Re: [gnupic] differences in lcall macros, Nestor A. Marchesini
Previous in thread: 24 Aug 2006 02:41:54 +0100 Re: [gnupic] gputils-0.13.4, octaloctal
Next in thread:

Subject: Re: [gnupic] gputils-0.13.4
From: Craig Franklin ####@####.####
Date: 24 Aug 2006 02:41:54 +0100
Message-Id: <44ED04D2.6080506@users.sourceforge.net>

octaloctal wrote:

> Hi Craig,
> Thank you for this upgrade.
> I havce posted on the sourceforge a request that have been closed. I 
> posted the request to have a parameter to let GPASM systematically 
> writing and *.ERR file like MPASM. In your answer you said to see 
> section 2.1.2 of the manual.

Just so you know, you can still post comments on closed bug reports.  
The report will be re-opened once you add the comment.

> The manual says to use a pipe with a redirection to TEE ...
> I think that this is not the way to do it, because:
> - This will be sufficient if we are only working on linux/*nix 
> workstations. This will not work under WINxx workstations.
> - I'm launching GPASM (and GPLink/Gplib) from a soft written in JAVA. 
> So if I use redirection I have to reparse the generated file. The 
> output file will contain all the messages written to the console from 
> the launch process. So I'll have to remove all the lines that do not 
> relay to ERROR(or warning or messages) form the created file. This 
> will not be the case if we have a really clean *.err file (the way 
> that MPASM do it).
> - If we want a maximum compatibility between MPASM ans GPASM I think 
> that we have to add this functionnality. This will simplify and make 
> uniforme the way we deal with output from both assemblers under any 
> operating system.
>
I understand now what you are trying to do.  This should be a simple 
task, but I am really busy.  If you or someone out there wants to take a 
try at generating an error file I will gladly test it and apply the patch.

Any takers?  Who ever does it will get a free copy of gputils-0.13.5.

> Best regards.
> octal(a-t)pocketmt.com
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Craig Franklin" 
> ####@####.####
> To: "GNUPIC" ####@####.####
> Sent: Sunday, August 20, 2006 3:47 AM
> Subject: [gnupic] gputils-0.13.4
>
>
>> gputils-0.13.4 has been released.  It is available at:
>>
>> http://gputils.sourceforge.net/
>>
>> 2006-08-19 Craig Franklin ####@####.####
>>  * gputils 0.13.4 Released.
>>  * [gputils] Updated header files and linker scripts.
>>  * [gputils] Fixed UPPER to mask with 0xff instead of 0x3f.
>>  * [gpasm] Mask MOVLB with 0xf instead of 0xff.
>>  * [gpasm] Fixed default access bit for extended pic16e.
>>
>> 2005-12-19 Craig Franklin ####@####.####
>>  * [gpasm] Fixed 18xx config bug when config the last section.
>>
>> 2005-10-13 Craig Franklin ####@####.####
>>  * [gputils] Fixed bsr boundary for 18f2455/2550/4455/4550.
>>
>> 2005-08-18 Borut Razem ####@####.####
>>  * [gplib] Allow forward and back slashes as directory delimiters.
>>
>> There are a bunch of patches to apply.  Expect a few more releases in 
>> the near future.  Hopefully it doesn't take another year :)
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: ####@####.####
>> For additional commands, e-mail: ####@####.####
>>
>>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: ####@####.####
> For additional commands, e-mail: ####@####.####
>
>


Previous by date: 24 Aug 2006 02:41:54 +0100 Re: [gnupic] differences in lcall macros, Craig Franklin
Next by date: 24 Aug 2006 02:41:54 +0100 Re: [gnupic] differences in lcall macros, Nestor A. Marchesini
Previous in thread: 24 Aug 2006 02:41:54 +0100 Re: [gnupic] gputils-0.13.4, octaloctal
Next in thread:


Powered by ezmlm-browse 0.20.