IDE Profiling

QNX Newsgroups (Archives) qnx.development_tools
41

Miguel Simon wrote:

Thanks. That is what I thought. I think that this release or patch has
been coming for a long time now. What is the name of the release, ‘SP1’
or ‘patch A’? Just as others have mentioned, is QSSL changing to the
‘SP’ versus ‘patch’ naming convention? Thanks.

I think the change is to reflect scope… a “Service Pack” applies to
several areas of the product (OS, tools, etc.) and a “Patch” applies to
just one thing (such as a tools update).

Also, do you know (or can you tell) what are some of the things that are
included in this next release? For example, the Java VM, would it be a
new version close to at least Java 1.4.2_0x? How about the IDE for the
PE edition, would it be closer to Eclipse 3.0? Thanks.

I can’t say anything about what’s included or not until an announcement
is made.

–
Chris Herborth (cherborth@qnx.com)
Never send a monster to do the work of an evil scientist.

42

Hi Chris…

Thanks.

Regards…

Miguel.



Chris Herborth wrote:

Miguel Simon wrote:

Thanks. That is what I thought. I think that this release or patch has
been coming for a long time now. What is the name of the release,
‘SP1’ or ‘patch A’? Just as others have mentioned, is QSSL changing
to the ‘SP’ versus ‘patch’ naming convention? Thanks.


I think the change is to reflect scope… a “Service Pack” applies to
several areas of the product (OS, tools, etc.) and a “Patch” applies to
just one thing (such as a tools update).

Also, do you know (or can you tell) what are some of the things that
are included in this next release? For example, the Java VM, would it
be a new version close to at least Java 1.4.2_0x? How about the IDE
for the PE edition, would it be closer to Eclipse 3.0? Thanks.


I can’t say anything about what’s included or not until an announcement
is made.

43

I really wish I could use the new IDE. Is it possible to make it
backward compatible with 6.2.1 targets? Like specifying different
qconn etc?
If you install 6.3.0 on a system with 6.2.1 already installed, you
have the option of using 6.2.1 or 6.3.0 tools. As for things that
aren’t under the aegis of the IDE (like qconn), if you didn’t upgrade
your target machine, it’d still be running the 6.2.1 versions.

I know that. My situation is this. Targets run 6.2.1b. Cannot be upgraded.
IDE 6.2.1 is completely unuseable. IDE 6.3.0 does not cooperate with 6.2.1
targets.

So, I am using vim/make/gdb, and I have no way of profiling.

I think the QNX Makefile hierarchy is going to use qcc, so you
probably want to add:
CCOPTS+=-Wc,-gdwarf-2
LDOPTS+=-Wl,-gdwarf-2

Tried that, but they are not seen by the compiler at all, so I tried
CCFLAGS+=-Wc,-gdwarf-2
(the linker did not accept the argument so I left LDFLAGS out).

This option was accepted by the compiler, but it had no affect. Line number
reference from the profiler/debugger are still mucked up.

Perhaps Steve Reid has some more information on this?

However, this does NOT solve the off-by-one line problem.
No, but I think 6.3.0SP1 improves this.

Improves? Is it now off by 1/2 a line? :slight_smile:

Use the ELF parser. Binaries in QNX are in ELF format; the PE
parser is there to support Windows development from Eclipse (ie,
it’s part of the generic CDT, not an add-on from Momentics)… PE
is the binary format for Windows.
Aha. Thanks - that makes sense. Perhaps a mention in the docs would
be worth someone’s time?
Good idea, I’ll add it to The List™ for the IDE User’s Guide.

Cool, thanks.

44

On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 15:30:19 -0500, Chris Herborth <cherborth@qnx.com>
wrote:

Miguel Simon wrote:
Thanks. That is what I thought. I think that this release or patch has
been coming for a long time now. What is the name of the release,
‘SP1’ or ‘patch A’? Just as others have mentioned, is QSSL changing to
the ‘SP’ versus ‘patch’ naming convention? Thanks.

I think the change is to reflect scope… a “Service Pack” applies to
several areas of the product (OS, tools, etc.) and a “Patch” applies to
just one thing (such as a tools update).

Will it go through a beta cycle?
If not, I think it may be a good idea to do so…
IT sounds like this SP will touch a wide range of functionality.

45

Robert Muil <r.muil@crcmining.com.au> wrote:

Perhaps Steve Reid has some more information on this?

Not me. Chris is the writer who’s working on the IDE User’s Guide, so he
knows a lot more about the IDE than I. I’ll learn more the next time I
get to edit it. :slight_smile:

Steve Reid stever@qnx.com
TechPubs (Technical Publications)
QNX Software Systems