Re: [avrdude-dev] Initial STK600 support committed to CVS

[Bob Paddock]

On Friday 14 March 2008 05:18:12 pm Weddington, Eric wrote:

> > Last time we've been discussing it, the only/main concern with
> > per-device configuration files was that scattering several dozens of
> > files on the target system contributes to wasted disk space due to
> > file system fragmentation.
>
> This has got to be a complete non-issue. What with hard disk sizes per
> cost these days, it shouldn't matter if there is some wasted space due
> to fragmentation. I would much rather have a file organization that
> makes sense.

> > If that's the only point, I'd propose a
> > scheme where there are separate XML files (one per device, one per
> > programmer) within the development tree, but they will then be
> > combined into a single avrdude-conf.xml during the build, so the
> > target system will still have just one configuration file.
>
> This just adds another unnecessary step to the build process. Please
> don't.

I have 1T bytes worth of disk space in this machine, but I still agree with
 Joerg.  Adding a build step here is still significantly faster than
opening and closing a lot of small files due to the OS overhead,
during the build.

In the GUI there is a button that causes a read of all the XML
files in a passed directory location, and builds the device.conf
file.  You only use it when you get new Studio XML files,
as it is not a fast process.
I can make this a standalone program if that helps.

Having per devices files for AVRDude also causes complications
in that you now have to add code to select the correct device file.

> I definitely lean towards one xml file per device or per programmer.

Ditto on programmer selection issue.

It would be better to have one, structured, file that is the aggregation of 
the Studio files, and a second, structured, file that contains the rest of 
the data that AVRDude needs.

Far easier to code open( "devices.conf" ) open( "avrdude.conf" ),
than deal with what files to select.

> It  makes it simpler to add support (just add a new file). These files
> should probably be kept in a standardized named subdirectory tree,
> relative to where the avrdude executable is located.

That could be a problem on Vista.  Probably not an issue if you
only need to read the files.  I'll know for sure in a couple of weeks,
as we are starting to migrate some of our projects to Vista, 
because our customers are buying new machines and they come with
Vista.  :-(

Any Vista gurus on the list that have been down this road?  So far the major 
issue is that you have to "take ownership of the drive", such fun
explaining that to the customers.  Even if your an Admin
you still get "Access Denied" errors because the manufacture
"owns" the drive.  You really don't want Dell owning your drive...


-- 
                http://www.wearablesmartsensors.com/
 http://www.softwaresafety.net/ http://www.designer-iii.com/
                 http://www.unusualresearch.com/