Re: [avr-gcc-list] Re: [avrdude-dev] [RFC] avrdude Feature Request andCall for Volunteers

[Galen Seitz]

Eric Weddington wrote:
>  
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: 
> > address@hidden 
> > [mailto:address@hidden
> > org] On Behalf Of Joerg Wunsch
> > Sent: Friday, March 09, 2007 2:21 PM
> > To: address@hidden; address@hidden
> > Subject: [avr-gcc-list] Re: [avrdude-dev] [RFC] avrdude 
> > Feature Request andCall for Volunteers

...snip...

> > Also, it
> > might be useful to be able to suppress updating individual parts on
> > some invocations.  Not only that updating the fuses to the same value
> > could perhaps contribute to some EEPROM cell wear, but you might not
> > want to re-initialize your EEPROM all the time as well.  (Isn't that
> > what has already been bothering AVR Studio users? ;-)
>
> Well the only solution is, of course, read-before-write, and only write if
> different. I assume this can be done on the fuses and eeprom.
>
> Also, realize that the feature that I'm proposing is *intended* for factory
> programming for manufacturing, i.e. this would likely be used for the
> initial, first programming of a device. Not necessarily used in an R&D
> environment where EEPROM cell wear may become an issue after thousands of
> programming cycles.

FWIW, I would prefer to use the same file for development and production.
A single file reduces the number of variables when someone calls and says
'It doesn't work'.  

I like the idea of read-before-write, but for development I would still 
want some way to control whether flash, eeprom, or fuses are written on 
an individual basis.  For development work I would like to tell avrdude 
to verify the fuses and then write to flash.  I think this would catch 
the majority of my own programming mistakes.

galen