Re: 5.0 much slower than 4.2
- From: "Paul G. Tobey [eMVP]" <p space tobey no spam AT no instrument no spam DOT com>
- Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2006 08:46:12 -0700
Yes, they didn't effectively distinguish between things that were
processor-specific and board-specific in that case. Yes, with suitable
modifications, you should be able to move any code anywhere. You'll
certainly learn about the build system...
Paul T.
"John" <johnnypav@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:70C8375F-DAFE-4B3C-9E2A-0531F7B1534F@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Under public. The updated "mainstone iii" source tree is also directly
under
public as csp_pxa27x. I have no idea why Intel/Microsoft did this like
this
- it looks sloppy. Can I just move this code under my platform though?
"Paul G. Tobey [eMVP]" wrote:
If you "duplicated" it, where did you duplicate it? The right way to do
that would be to put it in the Platform folder corresponding to your BSP,
not to add another folder under PUBLIC. You should, as much as you
possibly
can, treat PUBLIC as read-only.
Paul T.
"John" <johnnypav@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:86C13386-E46A-4D2B-9C2A-2E5759C9406D@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
What about building the CSP_PXA27x branch under the public tree (which
I
had
to duplicate since Intel had lots of Mainstone specific junk mixed in).
"Paul G. Tobey [eMVP]" wrote:
When you do Build and Sysgen, you're recompiling the entire PUBLIC
folder
structure (the things that Microsoft is trying to ship in binary
format
only), so yes, that's completely wrong. Remove that item from your
Build
menu, in fact, because you don't want to accidentally do it. It will
screw
up the libraries that you should have gotten directly from the
original
PB
install.
Sysgen is what you want.
Paul T.
"Hari Seldon" <HariSeldon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:0C3EA10A-67CB-4F6E-8C50-716D369E37A7@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Yes I am doing Build and Sysgen. Should I just do Sysgen?
"Dean Ramsier" wrote:
You're not running "Build and Sysgen" are you? Don't do that, not
ever.
It
rebuilds the public tree which should never be necessary and could
possibly
corrupt your installation.
--
Dean Ramsier - eMVP
BSQUARE Corporation
"Hari Seldon" <HariSeldon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
message
news:DD909BEE-5E87-4C71-B8C8-7DDB37407F11@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
No I don't.
"Bruce Eitman (eMVP)" wrote:
Do you have clean before building set, that would slow down your
builds.
--
Bruce Eitman (eMVP)
Senior Engineer
beitman AT applieddata DOT net
Applied Data Systems
www.applieddata.net
An ISO 9001:2000 Registered Company
Microsoft WEP Gold-level Member
"Hari Seldon" <HariSeldon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
message
news:813140C3-4303-46A7-A111-347464C70CE0@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Just switched from PB 4.2 to PB 5.0 the build time on 5.0 is
really
slow
(15
minutes+) compared to 4.2 (5 minutes) on the same machine. Is
this
most
peoples experience or are there some settings I need to change
in
PB?
Thank You,
Hari
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: 5.0 much slower than 4.2
- From: John
- Re: 5.0 much slower than 4.2
- References:
- Re: 5.0 much slower than 4.2
- From: Bruce Eitman \(eMVP\)
- Re: 5.0 much slower than 4.2
- From: Dean Ramsier
- Re: 5.0 much slower than 4.2
- From: Paul G. Tobey [eMVP]
- Re: 5.0 much slower than 4.2
- From: John
- Re: 5.0 much slower than 4.2
- From: Paul G. Tobey [eMVP]
- Re: 5.0 much slower than 4.2
- From: John
- Re: 5.0 much slower than 4.2
- Prev by Date: Re: how to hook into NDIS on CE5
- Next by Date: ActiveSync<->Ethernet
- Previous by thread: Re: 5.0 much slower than 4.2
- Next by thread: Re: 5.0 much slower than 4.2
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
