This is the mail archive of the
ecos-discuss@sourceware.org
mailing list for the eCos project.
Re: Re: eCos configuration question (was Re: General Q ...)
- From: Andrew Lunn <andrew at lunn dot ch>
- To: "Paul D. DeRocco" <pderocco at ix dot netcom dot com>
- Cc: ecos-discuss at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: Thu, 31 May 2007 19:35:34 +0200
- Subject: Re: [ECOS] Re: eCos configuration question (was Re: [ECOS] General Q ...)
- References: <f3ms2c$25i$1@sea.gmane.org> <013401c7a3a7$9ddf46f0$887ba8c0@PAULD>
On Thu, May 31, 2007 at 10:17:49AM -0700, Paul D. DeRocco wrote:
> > From: Grant Edwards
> >
> > I don't think any of the "pros" do. AFAICT, it's just
> > eye-candy to lessen the initial culture shock for Visual-C
> > programmers. ;)
>
> Other than just a hackish preference for command lines, is there anything
> that ecosconfig can do that configtool can't?
You are forgetting the unix philosophy. It is not configtool vs
ecosconfig, it is configtool vs ecosconfig+emacs+vim+sed+grep+awk+bash.....
Being able to combine these together gives you something very
flexible, powerful, and extensible.
> The latter seems pretty useful, as it lets you see all the
> documentation on options that is otherwise scattered around a
> million .cdl files.
The document for all loaded packages is in the ecos.ecc file. So you
can use more,less,emacs,vim etc to display and probably more
importantly, search it.
Andrew
--
Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://ecos.sourceware.org/fom/ecos
and search the list archive: http://ecos.sourceware.org/ml/ecos-discuss