32bit & 64bit – clashing of worlds

ok, i suppose it makes sense, i had issues with 64 bit runtimes appearing in Arduino_STM32/tools/linux
whilst i was running 32 bits. now i’ve gone to 64 bit, main systems wise no problems.

silliness time Asus Eee-1005P netbook. i’ve got to do something with it.
So i stuck xubuntu netbook on it. followed by all things required:- java, arduino 1.6.5 and arduino_stm32; not quite paint drying speed.

now of course i have an issue on the netbook with upload_maple calling i suspect a 64 bit executable.
it’s not fair.

so any thoughts?
1. if you’re stuck on 32 bit, compile tools as required, on the netbook – i’ve not a clue at the moment.
2. if you’re 32 bit, but could go 64 bit, compile tools as needed, as i did
3. if you’re already 64 bit, wonderful
4. you’re a newcomer, you need to start reading
5. talk some kind person(s) into compiling ‘static library’ versions of the tools in each format. means no missing dynamic libraries. i’d need to read up on how to do that.
6. resist the temptation to tickle the stretched out on her back, snoring feline .. .. ..

and i missed the first 1hr 58min of play of the fa cup final, i also missed most of the 1966 world cup final 2nd half and extra time as well

stephen

all things required:- java, arduino 1.6.5 and arduino_stm32; not quite paint drying speed.

Really should be on 1.6.9 IDE. Make certain ti install the Due board.

W/ Linux Mint 64-bit on my Acer, I am not having an issue. W/Mint 32-bit last month, on an old Dell D610, I needed to recompile DFU_UTIL but that may all be fixed now.

Ray

i believe i’ve posted a few times on the topic of not knowing which i’d get:- dfu-utils compiled for 32 bit or one for 64 bit. maybe i wasn’t clear.
there are people who will never switch to 64 bit, there are people who have done, do we say you’ll need to compile for 32 bit?
we used to have 32 bit binaries, now we have 64 bit, the sources are the same, if you built with static libs for each, declare the list of libraries with versions for QA, supply both binaries with md5sums, then there isn’t a problem. at some point the 32 bit version will become quite static (even a zip file), even if/unless the sources change.(cosmetic/major)
i suspect it will be either a script to install the tools or instructions to the user on how to setup the tools to be the ones needed.

1.6.5r5 has been going for a fair while without problems, i know the recommendation for switching minimum or compatible version is on the cusp of changing. i’m not aware it’s mandatory as yet, suggested – yes.
i thought i’d give 1.6.9 a chance to settle, might be 1.6.9a next week.

board manager, i normally install/re-install the package (mentioning cortex-m3 in the blurb) at the ide version rather than the latest, not sure what platform they’re for though.

so what will you do when you add another 32 bit machine, install everything and find 64 bit dfu-utils one day and
then 32 bit in the next weeks github zip.
that was what was happening to me; i wouldn’t have minded consistently one or the other, i’m capable of compiling them. i normally end up with everything the configure script lists as not found. btw at this point synaptic is definitely running

stephen

zmemw16 wrote:
<…>
so what will you do when you add another 32 bit machine, install everything and find 64 bit dfu-utils one day and
then 32 bit in the next weeks github zip.

stephen

We have started to look at having separate 64 bit linux binaries, but I found the IDE doesn’t support linux vs linux64 bit tools.

So I’ll need to put linux and linux64 bit folders under the linux folder and get the scripts to detect 32/64 bit and call the appropriate binary

But.. Just to make things more complex, it appears that some of the static libs used by some of the utilities (I think Texane STLink has this issue), are not in the same location in different Linux distros’ which means that STLink doesnt even work on some 32 bit machines.

However I think the amount of effort required to get STLink working on all 32 and 64 bit linux distros’ is too great for the few users that have this issue.

So its probably best to ask anyone with that problem to recompile Texane STLInk from source, as this fixed the issue.

reminds me a little bit of year 1999/2000

i used st link last night with a M75 like ZET board, has eeprom and sdio wired sd card. no issues, my blink with serial output worked.
istr seeing at some point, M75, M76 and M77 variants. might be a fourth as well?? ??

i have 2 boards that are similar in layout, both have eeprom and sdio, the larger zet has flash memory as well as an empty nand pads. both have micro usb, rtc crystals, boot switches and a stlink 4 pin header.
measuring is based on bread board holes, so maybe +/-0.1″
zet is 2.4″ x 1.9″, double row connector all round except for half a short side
vet is 1.9″ x 1.2″, double row connector on both long edges and one short side

its the lack of consistent packaging in what should be pretty solid, the support tools.
i appreciate it’s in the main, un-versioned software, it means you’re never quite sure what’s going on, you try to pin it down and it changes appearance. i’d take money you’ve all been there. it don’t run, add in ddt and it all behaves perfectly. then you are looking for a will-of-a-wisp. i like doing that.

stephen

on tickling the inverted, elongated feline, don’t! 2 sets of four in elbow, 2 sets of five in the wrist and 4 fangs in my hand

can you post links to those boards

zmemw16 wrote:
…
on tickling the inverted, elongated feline, don’t! 2 sets of four in elbow, 2 sets of five in the wrist and 4 fangs in my hand

ahull wrote:<…>
You need an upgrade to improve your fickle feline protection.

she’s just being her definition of friendly.
ever since i gassed her, she mews/moans if i’m the wrong side of a door.

i’ll do some order searching on aliexpress.

i will go get my phone.

smaller of the two, this has a silk screen taobao link and i suspect some evidence of rework around the processor

2016-05-22 19.32.25.jpg (121.97 KiB) Viewed 912 times

and the other is really nicely soldered, maybe a couple or three pins, solder reflects differently

2016-05-22 19.30.38.jpg (121.23 KiB) Viewed 503 times

i’m getting 404’s if i go to the orders links. they are above 6 months old

m75 the link at the time went to here
http://www.ebay.co.uk/usr/gc_supermarke … 2749.l2754

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/STM32F103RBT6 … 3f56f14105 ???

not found the m76 board, poss/prob i didn’t get one as its the diddy, anyway
m75 is a ZE
m76 is RB
m77 is VE

srp

Looks like the VET board I have.

I think I already put it in the wiki, but perhaps not the photo.

I think the Micro SD card is connected to SDIO so we don’t currently support using it.

the circuit diagram shows the wiring to PC pins, all identified in the 10xx document as SDIO lines.

however i saw a circuit connecting a micro sd card socket to an arduino SPI;
so if we tristate the SDIO lines, why couldn’t we just link them across to SPI2 or SPI3. i think VE has 2 and ZE 3 ???
the assumption is they break out those lines on the pcb. yep, on the P1 connector. they also have pullups on them.

stephen

@Roger
I found this post of yours and wondered if you’d managed to do anything with the code ?
http://www.stm32duino.com/viewtopic.php … sdio#p2329

i cloned it and tried a ‘build all’ in mars eclipse, it reports ‘nothing to build’ … … hence the query.

stephen

Stephen

I never got around to trying it.

Not sure why it thinks there is nothing to build.

Sounds like a dodgy makefile (or mal configured eclipse project)

@Roger
i’m been there done that, i did have a fully working eclipse luna with gnuarm and SPI – it got clobbered, indirectly in the 32/64 bit transision.
so i’m putting it together again, will get a SPL blinky project going and do a bit of substitution, see what happens.

stephen