Re: Build w/no errors, still will not start.

From: Gordon Smith \(eMVP\) (Gordon.Smith_at_nospam.avnet.com)
Date: 03/22/04 

Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 15:58:08 -0700

Typo: "command set" should be "common set". Ooops

--Gordon Smith (eMVP)

Gordon Smith (eMVP) wrote:
> There are some tutorials on msdn.microsoft.com/embedded that walk you
> through a generally approved methodology of creating an OS. There is
> a bit of Art, and a bit of Science when it comes to creating an
> embedded OS (from any vendor). In situations where you are
> incorporing third party (ie: not from the vendor, such as Microsoft)
> it's not often immediately apparant what the third party needs from
> the operating system. There is a bit of trial and error (art) and a
> bit of investigating (science) using tools like REGSNAP, INCTRL5, etc.
>
> Step 1 (imho) is always: Use TAP, import into CD, use selector
> prototype, save SLD, import into CDB
> Step 2 (imho) is usually: In TD, add your new hardware macro
> component and device template. Prune NOW before checking
> dependancies.
> Step 3 (imho) is generically stated as "choosing the union of
> components as determined by your apps/drivers and your hardware".
> Step 4 (imho) is tailoring the image for deployment.
>
> Short answer: No. There isn't a 100% bulletproof list of things to
> do. Not-so-short answer. Yes. There is a command set of problems to
> solve using deterministic methods.
> Harsh truth. Sort of. You get better at it through repetition.
> Exposure to issues is what makes people able to create images faster
> than others.
>
> --Gordon Smith (eMVP)
>
> Tony wrote:
>> Thanks for the all tips on this. Since I posted this, I was able to
>> use the result of running TAP.exe to create a working image. I
>> created a component from the TAP file, then made it a Selector type
>> component because TD wants to throw in the kitchen sink when all the
>> TAP components are used. So now I just need to find out what I can
>> leave out and still get what I need from the OS. But it definitely
>> worked better for me with the TAP results.
>>
>> On that note, is there a more formal process for doing this? By that
>> I mean is there a less ad-hoc way to determine what components are
>> needed to build a system with the features you want? The turn-around
>> time on my target (dependency check, build, file transfer, FBA, and
>> reboot) is around 20-55 minutes a pop. At this point, I've spent
>> about 2 weeks just getting as far as I have and the images we are
>> able
>> to produce are a long way from where they need to be. Seems like
>> there should be some kind of "dependecy map" or something like that
>> to help people out. I would expect the "try things until it works"
>> philosophy from something like RT Linux, but not from a professional
>> product like XP Embedded. I don't mean that as an insult, but maybe
>> I just don't know about all the resources I have yet.
>>
>> Thanks for any tips you can give me.
>>
>> - Tony H.
>>
>>
>>> This is a fairly common error people run into. Most likely, you are
>>> missing some critical component. Have you tried using TAP.EXE
>>> instead of TA.EXE to see what it discovers that TA.EXE didn't?
>>>
>>> --Gordon Smith (eMVP)

Relevant Pages