st-link2/ide1.8.2/linux64 issue?

Post Reply
joki
Posts: 1
Joined: Tue Apr 11, 2017 10:25 pm

st-link2/ide1.8.2/linux64 issue?

Post by joki » Tue Apr 11, 2017 10:40 pm

The stlink upload script seems to travel to /linux/stlink and not /linux64/stlink.

I copied the linux64/stlink tools over to linux/stlink and it seems to upload OK.

I activated the script linux64/install.sh script before I tried this.

( BTW thanks Roger, Rick and others for all the excellent work. )

zmemw16
Posts: 1584
Joined: Wed Jul 08, 2015 2:09 pm
Location: St Annes, Lancs,UK

Re: st-link2/ide1.8.2/linux64 issue?

Post by zmemw16 » Wed Apr 12, 2017 1:27 am

that's been around a while, i also did the copy as well, also a while back.
not noticed it recently, but that's more likely down to me having installed the ia32 support files/libraries
forgotten what i did it for though :D
stephen

lacklustrlabs
Posts: 12
Joined: Fri May 05, 2017 12:35 pm

Re: st-link2/ide1.8.2/linux64 issue?

Post by lacklustrlabs » Wed Dec 20, 2017 10:38 am

Is there a fix for this? It's getting tiresome to link linux->linux64 every time i change current branch.
I'm still using Arduino 1.6.12 (not interested in installing ia32 support)

I suppose I could use a custom platform.txt, but it would be better if the build/flash system would work right out of the box, as intended.

Edit: I just discovered that I can make a STM32F1/platform.local.txt file:

Code: Select all

tools.maple_upload.path.linux={runtime.hardware.path}/tools/linux64
tools.serial_upload.path.linux={runtime.hardware.path}/tools/linux64
tools.stlink_upload.path.linux={runtime.hardware.path}/tools/linux64
tools.jlink_upload.path.linux={runtime.hardware.path}/tools/linux64
This is still not a 'out of the box' solution, but it works for my needs.
Now if only STM32F1/platform.local.txt could be added to .gitignore...

User avatar
mrburnette
Posts: 2023
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 12:50 pm
Location: Greater Atlanta
Contact:

Re: st-link2/ide1.8.2/linux64 issue?

Post by mrburnette » Wed Dec 20, 2017 1:50 pm

I see this (generic) question all the time in various forms:
Is there a fix for this?
lacklustrlabs determined a decent work-around approach. Is it ideal? No, but workable? I think so. There may be a better way and hopefully others will chime-in if they have been successful at a solution.

But, does it really need to be fixed? Like, "fixed" in the installation or core or configuration? Is the defect a showstopper?

Consider that there is only one gatekeeper to the master code repository on github, and that is Roger. Pulling requests, testing, implementing, rolling-back when something breaks. Add to that that he is paying the bills for hosting this forum.

Point is, not everything needs to be immediately fixed ... in fact, many things can just be referenced back from a discussion thread to the WiKi to document the workaround and then to the core issues for defect documentation.

Older users of the forum likely have WiKi access. As I recall, newer users must request write access because of the mess caused by robots building accounts and spamming us... same problem as on the forum which is why one must now post in the new user area before they get access to the larger site.

Ray

lacklustrlabs
Posts: 12
Joined: Fri May 05, 2017 12:35 pm

Re: st-link2/ide1.8.2/linux64 issue?

Post by lacklustrlabs » Wed Dec 20, 2017 3:35 pm

Bha, I see no harm in asking the hive mind for solutions to problems.
Chances are that someone has a much smarter solution than I can come up with.
And by the way, I did search for solution to this problem before posting, that's how i found this related thread in the first place.

But I'm sorry if I sounded demanding. That was not my intention.

User avatar
mrburnette
Posts: 2023
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 12:50 pm
Location: Greater Atlanta
Contact:

Re: st-link2/ide1.8.2/linux64 issue?

Post by mrburnette » Wed Dec 20, 2017 3:50 pm

lacklustrlabs wrote:
Wed Dec 20, 2017 3:35 pm
Bha, I see no harm in asking the hive mind for solutions to problems.
Chances are that someone has a much smarter solution than I can come up with.
And by the way, I did search for solution to this problem before posting, that's how i found this related thread in the first place.

But I'm sorry if I sounded demanding. That was not my intention.
No problem...
I was attempting to give a "generic" answer anyway, not specific to you. It is difficult to do in a thread and if placed off in some thread to itself, it never gets read. But as the forum grows, these kinds of issues are increasing and solutions beyond documentation do require Roger Clark's input.

We all want Roger to continue working and being financially productive since this forum depends on his charity. But the forum, unlike Arduino.cc, is not moderated and with all of the new-comers in the ranks, the past history of how we got here is simply non-existent. Of course, those that know Roger have for years been telling him he works too long on forum issues - a happy Roger means we want to be very cautious and not anger Mrs. Clark :lol:

Ray

zmemw16
Posts: 1584
Joined: Wed Jul 08, 2015 2:09 pm
Location: St Annes, Lancs,UK

Re: st-link2/ide1.8.2/linux64 issue?

Post by zmemw16 » Wed Dec 20, 2017 3:52 pm

if you're running a 64bit system then i suspect the easiest way is to install ia32 support. if you google debian ia32 support, there's a few pages showing how, what and why. it's not that painful ;)

when i was running 32bit, i had a yell off the soapbox awhile back that something was wrong in someone's system as for a few iterations it seemed to toggle between 32bit and 64bit versions in the linux tree and required a copy. actually i think i just built my own from the source :-)
certainly re-appeared when i went to 64bit, hence the ia32 search.
not in fact the correct solution, that would be to correct the build mechanism.
that would probably be to build both 32/64bit versions on a 64bit machine and the ia32 version scripting to be corrected to use 32bit mode.
oops end soapbox :D
stephen

User avatar
Rick Kimball
Posts: 1067
Joined: Tue Apr 28, 2015 1:26 am
Location: Eastern NC, US
Contact:

Re: st-link2/ide1.8.2/linux64 issue?

Post by Rick Kimball » Wed Dec 20, 2017 4:09 pm

lacklustrlabs wrote:
Wed Dec 20, 2017 10:38 am
I suppose I could use a custom platform.txt, but it would be better if the build/flash system would work right out of the box, as intended.

Edit: I just discovered that I can make a STM32F1/platform.local.txt file:
You can take the approach I did. I created a makefile and custom board.txt file I merge with the github one:

https://gist.github.com/RickKimball/71a ... 2ecf4e095/

Take that as an example of how to add your own favorite setup for a specific board. You can do the same thing with platform.txt
-rick

Post Reply