It's a simple question, yet for the life of me, can't find a simple answer to this question.
I don't believe there is a way to clear the cached build paths through the CMake GUI nor through the command line interface; however, in windows you can use the registry editor and navigate to HKEY_CURRENT_USER/SOFTWARE/Kitware/CMakeSetup/Settings/StartPath. There, you'll see some indexed variables prefixed by "WhereBuild". You can modify these paths or delete them entirely.
On OS X, these variables are stored in a properties list located in $HOME/Library/Preferences/com.kitware.CMakeSetup.plist.
On other Unix/Linux-based systems, you may find it in $HOME/.config/Kitware/CMakeSetup.conf
Related
I make a fair amount portable Apps for personal use and they work perfectly for the most part. I do, however, find it quite frustrating that if I run them on another computer none of my preferences are retained, as a program always looks in appData for the configuration files (which obviously don't exist on another system), so I'm wondering whether there is some kind of command line to launch an .exe with a custom .ini location.
I'm asking this firstly because Google has proved fruitless (once again) and secondly because I know it's possible - I've actually done this before, but with only one of my Apps. I accomplished this by launching the App via the command programFile.exe -f configFile.ini /s (I have also seen programFile.exe -d -f configFile.ini /s elsewhere). Naturally, I thought I would try to apply this to some other Apps but it seems it only works for that particular App.
So, is there a command/switch that I am unaware of that will do this for an .exe file?
Thanks
It really depends on each executable file you are using. Some have support for what you are looking for, and some don't. Some programs don't even use .ini files. What you should look for is if each and every program you use have support for user data custom location.
Edit
The only case where generic arguments would be avaialble for a group of EXE files is if they are generated with the same tool, which automatically provides these arguments for you. InstallShield and MSI install programs have that kind of feature (with the silent install and automated installation for instance).
I suggest you look into the tool you are using to generate your portable Apps, and see if it does provide those generic arguments for you, and how they work. If it does not have that feature, then look into the Apps you were able to specify a custom location for your INI file. Somewhere into the code, there must be a piece of code that handles the arguments you specify to the EXE file and handles them. You should share that piece of code with your other Apps, to make sure they provide the same arguments list.
Which configuration management tool is the best for FPGA designs, specifically Xilinx FPGA's programmed with VHDL and C for the embedded (microblaze) software?
There isn't a "best", but configuration control solutions that work for software will be OK for FPGAs - the flow is very similar. I use Subversion at work and git at home, and wrote a little on 'why' at my blog.
In other answers, binary files keep getting mentioned - the only binary files I deal with are compilation products (equivalent to software object and executables), so I don't keep them in the version control repository, I keep a zipfile for each release/tag that I create with all the important (and irritatingly slow to reproduce) ones in.
I don't think it much matters what revision control tool you use -- anything that you would consider good in general will probably be OK here. I personally use Git for a sizable Verilog + software project, and I'm quite happy with it.
What will bite you in the ass -- no matter what version control you use -- is this: The Xilinx tools don't generally respect a clean division between "input" and "output" or between (human edited) "source" and (opaque) "binary." Many of the tools like to store some state information, like a last-run time or a hash value, in their "input" files meaning that you'll get lots of false changes. Coregen does this to its .xco files, and project navigator (the main GUI) does this to its .xise files. Also, both tools have a habit of inserting or removing lines for default-valued parameters, seemingly at random.
The biggest issue I've encountered is the work-flow with Coregen: In many cases, at least one of the following is true:
You have to manually edit the HDL files produced by Coregen.
The parameters that went into Coregen are stored somewhere other than the .xco file (usually in what looks like an output file).
You have to copy-and-paste the output from Coregen into your top-level design.
This means that there is no single logical source/master location for your input to the core-generating process. So even if you have the .xco file under version control, there's no expectation that the design you're running corresponds to it. If you re-generate "the same" core from its nominal inputs, you probably won't get the right outputs. And don't even think about merging.
I suggest CM tools that support version labeling and binary files. Most Software CM applications are fine with ASCII text files. They may just store a "difference" file rather than the entire file for updates.
My recommendations: PVCS, ClearCase and Subversion. DO NOT USE Microsoft SourceSafe. I don't like it because it only supports one label per revision.
I've seen Perforce and Subversion used in a couple of FPGA-intensive companies.
We use Perforce, and its great. You can have your code that lives in Linux-land checked in side-by-side with your Specs and Docs that live in Windows-land. And you get branching, labels, etc.
I've seen everything from Clearcase to RCS used, and it is really all okay for this kind of thing. The important thing is to get a good set of check-in policies established for your group, and make sure they stick to it.
And have automated nightly regressions. That way, when someone breaks the rules, they can be identified and publicly shamed.
I have personally used Perforce, Subverion, git and ClearCase for FPGA projects. Since VHDL and C are just text files, any works fine. However be sure to capture the other project and contraint files and any libraries you use.
Also think about what to do with the outputs, e.g. log file and bitstreams. Both tend to be big and the bitstreams are binaries.
Previously I used Subversion but have switched to git two years ago. Git handles FPGA design files just as well as it handles every other text and binary file. Git is all you need for version controlling your files and artifacts.
For building the designs, I recommend just using a single ISE project called "ise" (living in a subdirectory called "ise/"). You can take a look at my (very modest) FPGA open-source project on github for the file layout. I don't bother storing the ISE files at all since they are easy to regenerate. The only things I save are the Verilog files and some ISIM waveform config files. In other projects that use coregen I save the coregen.cgp project file and all of the *.xco scripts for regenerating cores. Then I use a Makefile for actually running coregen on the *.xco files. There are a few other Xilinx-specific files you should version control too: *.ucf, *.coe, *.xcf, etc.
I experimented with using Makefiles and the Xilinx command-line tools but found that ISE did a much better job tracking dependencies and calling the tools with the right arguments. Just don't make the mistake of trying to version control your ise/ project files or you will go mad. Xilinx has something like 300 different file types which change every release. If you want to save a file, you can try the ISE project file itself with a .xise extension. Anything that is hard to recreate, like the golden bitfile that you know works and took 6 hours to build, you might want to copy that and configuration manage it explicitly.
I'm writing a 'C' program that makes several calls to system() to execute other programs. When constructing the command string is it better to explicitly give the full path to the program being called, or should I just give the executable name and let the shell resolve its location using the PATH environment variable?
The programs I'm calling are all part of a single package and I have the path to the installation directory from a preprocessor definition. Giving the explicit path would seem to avoid errors that might occur if multiple installed programs share the same name. However it makes building the command strings a little more complicated, and everything will break if the user moves the programs around after installation.
Is there a widely accepted best practice covering this?
[Clarification]
I'm using autoconf/automake to generate the distribuion. The preprocessor definition providing the installation directory is created by the makefile. It reflects the user's choice of the installation directory as specified either on the configure comamnd line or the make command line. I do take the point about using environment variables to specify the location for the binaries though. It seems like an unneeded pain in the butt to make users rebuild just to change the location of the binaries.
Best practice is never to assume that you know your install directory at build time. Let your users decide where to install and work anyway.
This means that you will need to find out where your programs are located using some other mechanism. Consider using environment variables or command line parameters to allow the user to specify the actual path, if your platform does not provide you with the means to find out where the executables are located. You can use your knowledge of where you are normally installed as a fallback option.
For your actual question, in case you can build the absolute path to your program (using another mechanism than preprocessor directives) - use that. Otherwise, fall back to having the system find out for you.
The best practice is to not presume anything about the system you're installing onto. You can have the best of both worlds if you just let the user choose. Make the command you call an application preference or require paths to be defined in the environment:
PATH_TO_TOOL1=foo
PATH_TO_TOOL2=/usr/bin/bar
You can, of course, just fall back to a default of some kind if the variables aren't defined or the preference isn't set. Writing your application to be more flexible is always the best choice!
You should definitely let the user specify the path with an environment variable to the installed binaries. Not all systems are the same and many people will want to put their execs in different places.
the best example I can think of is people doing a local install vs system install. If your program is installed in a home directory that user will have to set and env variable to say where the binaries are copied to.
If you're absolutely sure of the path names, and if they are not "well-known" commands (for example, POSIX shell utilities on Unix are "well-known"), you should specify the pathname, otherwise don't specify the full path, or let the user control it by using an environment variable.
In fact, you may be able to write something like a function such as int my_system(const char *);, which does the prefixing of the path for you. If later you determine that it was a bad idea, it's just a matter of making my_system() identical to system().
I'm not sure if it's a best practice, but what I do in these cases is I write my C code to extend the PATH environment variable to include the installation directory at the end. Then I just use the PATH. That way, if the user's PATH wants to override where I believe the stuff was installed, it can—but if the software was installed in an out-of-the-way place, I can call it without forcing my users to put the directory on $PATH themselves.
Please note that the extended PATH lasts only as long as the C program runs; I'm not proposing changing the persistent PATH.
Whenever I start a new project, I have to go through setting up the debugger with Eclipse time and time again before I can use it. Isn't there a default setting for all new C projects I can change?
I'm not sure exactly what you mean by "setting up the debugger" (perhaps you can clarify), but under "Preferences -> Run/Debug -> Launching -> Default Launchers" you should be able to select your preferred launcher for different kind of launch modes. This can also be selected individually for each launch configuration.
Typically it is up to the toolchain and/or project to determine which debugger/launcher is suitable to use for that specific project, but I know there is a bug in CDT which prevents toolchains from properly specifying the default launcher to use.
I only use Eclipse for Java, so I can't give you an authoritative answer. But since no one else seems to be answering:
Java projects have a (more or less) hidden file in the project directory called .project and another one called .settings . I'm not sure if this would apply to the C environment as well, but it seems likely. You may want to look at the set of such "hidden" files for a well set up project and a virginal project side by side to find out which settings make the difference.
Given that information, you may be able to simply edit (perhaps with some assistance from a script you can write yourself) the file(s) in question to do the configuration textually without a lot of mouse clicking.
I'm doing some Linux kernel development, and I'm trying to use Netbeans. Despite declared support for Make-based C projects, I cannot create a fully functional Netbeans project. This is despite compiling having Netbeans analyze a kernel binary that was compiled with full debugging information. Problems include:
files are wrongly excluded: Some files are incorrectly greyed out in the project, which means Netbeans does not believe they should be included in the project, when in fact they are compiled into the kernel. The main problem is that Netbeans will miss any definitions that exist in these files, such as data structures and functions, but also miss macro definitions.
cannot find definitions: Pretty self-explanatory - often times, Netbeans cannot find the definition of something. This is partly a result of the above problem.
can't find header files: self-explanatory
I'm wondering if anyone has had success with setting up Netbeans for Linux kernel development, and if so, what settings they used. Ultimately, I'm looking for Netbeans to be able to either parse the Makefile (preferred) or extract the debug information from the binary (less desirable, since this can significantly slow down compilation), and automatically determine which files are actually compiled and which macros are actually defined. Then, based on this, I would like to be able to find the definitions of any data structure, variable, function, etc. and have complete auto-completion.
Let me preface this question with some points:
I'm not interested in solutions involving Vim/Emacs. I know some people like them, but I'm not one of them.
As the title suggest, I would be also happy to know how to set-up Eclipse to do what I need
While I would prefer perfect coverage, something that only misses one in a million definitions is obviously fine
SO's useful "Related Questions" feature has informed me that the following question is related: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/149321/what-ide-would-be-good-for-linux-kernel-driver-development. Upon reading it, the question is more of a comparison between IDE's, whereas I'm looking for how to set-up a particular IDE. Even so, the user Wade Mealing seems to have some expertise in working with Eclipse on this kind of development, so I would certainly appreciate his (and of course all of your) answers.
Cheers
Eclipse seems to be pretty popular for Linux kernel development:
http://cdtdoug.blogspot.com/2008/12/linux-kernel-debugging-with-cdt.html
http://jakob.engbloms.se/archives/338
http://revver.com/video/606464/debugging-the-linux-kernel-using-eclipsecdt-and-qemu/
I previously wrote up an answer. Now I come up with all the details of the solution and would like to share it. Unfortunately stackoverflow does not allow me to edit the previous answer. So I write it up in this new answer.
It involves a few steps.
[1] The first step is to modify linux scripts to leave dep files in. By default after using them in the build, those dep files are removed. Those dep files contains exact dependency information about which other files a C file depends. We need them to create a list of all the files involved in a build. Thus, modify files under linux-x.y.z/scripts to make them not to remove the dep files like this:
linux-3.1.2/scripts
Kbuild.include: echo do_not_rm1 rm -f $(depfile);
Makefile.build: echo do_not_rm2 rm -f $(depfile);
The other steps are detailed in my github code project file https://github.com/minghuascode/Nbk/blob/master/note-nbkparse. Roughly you do:
[2] Configure with your method of configuration, but be sure use "O=" option to build the obj files into a separate directory.
[3] Then use the same "O=" option and "V=1" option to build linux, and save make output into a file.
[4] Run my nbkparse script from the above github project. It does:
[4.1] Read in the make log file, and the dep files. Generate a mirroring command.
[4.2] Run the mirroring command to hard-link the relevant source files into a separate tree, and generate a make-log file for NetBeans to use.
Now create a NetBeans C project using the mirrored source tree and the generated log file. NetBeans should be able to resolve all the kernel symbols. And you will only see the files involved in the build.
The Eclipse wiki has a page about this: HowTo use the CDT to navigate Linux kernel source
I have been doing some embedded linux development. Including kernel module development and have imported the entire linux kernel source code into Eclipse, as a separate project. I have been building the kernel itself outside of Eclipse(so far), but I don't any reason why I shouldn't be able to set up the build environment within Eclipse to build the kernel. For my projects, as long as I setup the PATH properties to point to the appropriate linux source include directories, it seems to be pretty good about name completion for struct fields, etc.
I can't really comment, on if it is picking up the correct defines and not greying out the correspond sections, as I haven't really paid to much attention to the files within the kernel itself.(so far)
I was also wondering about using Netbeans as a linux 'C' IDE, as I do prefer Netbean's for Java GUI development.
I think this would work (done each step for various projects):
[1] Modify kernel build scripts to leave .d files. By default they are removed.
[2] Log the build process to a file.
[3] Write a script to parse the build log.
[3.1] From the build log, you know every .c files.
[3.2] From the .c file, you know which is the corresponding .d file.
[3.3] Look into .d files to find out all the included .h files.
[3.4] Form a complete .c and .h file list.
[4] Now create a new dir, and use "ln -s" or "ln" to pick files of interest.
Now, create a Netbeans project for existing source code in the [4].
Configure code assistance to use make-log file. You should see
exactly the effective source code as when you build it at [2].
Some explanations to the above steps:
At [2], do a real build so the log file contains the exact files and flags of interest.
Later netbeans will be able to use the exact flags to parse.
At [4], pick only the files you want to see. Incorporating the whole kernel tree into netbeans will be unpractical.
There is a trick to parsing .d files: Many of the depended items are not real paths to a .h file, they are a modified entry for part of the linux config sections in the auto config file. You may need to reverse the modification to figure out which is the real header file.
Actually there is a topic on netbeans site. This is the discussion url: http://forums.netbeans.org/ntopic3075.html . And there is a wiki page linked from the discussion: wiki.netbeans.org/CNDLinuxKernel . Basically it asks you to prefix make with CFLAGS="-g3 -gdwarf-2" .
I found this link very helpful in setting up proper indexing in Eclipse. It requires running a script to alter Eclipse environment to match your kernel options, in my case
$ autoconf-to-eclipse.py ./include/generated/autoconf.h .
An illustrated guide to indexing the linux kernel in eclipse