I hope I am not saying this prematurely! I tried the following and it seemed to work. After your warning about hidden hooks, I was extra careful. I created a new project using the PE stationary and the A256 processor (I'll call it "np"). I immediately exited CodeWarrior (did no coding or anything). Then I copied all the files from the original project ("op") into the new one. Next I edited all the files copied from the first project that had to do with with the project itself: op.dsk, op.g_c, op.pe (anything that contained references to the original project and/or its directory -- used "find" as a tool). Then I copied these "op" files to "np" files. I renamed the main program from op.w to np.w, edited it to make the necessary changes between the two products, and "tangled" the .w file to get the .c file. I deleted the .c and .h files that were not going to be used by the new project (it lacks a couple of features of its bigger brother). When I started CodeWarrior and opened "np.mcp", I got all the files AND all the beans. I had to tweak some of the target settings (like ignoring some messages during compile and the name of the target). I deleted the beans not used by the new project. I ran a trial "code design", and build. Everything appeared to be fine. Checked all the files in the original project directories and none of them had changed. Then I switched the processor to DP256 and re-built (which also triggered a "code design" of all the beans). The resulting output ran on the brassboard. Again, none of the files in the original project were changed. I didn't like using Processor Expert (and am not wild about IDEs) but the folks paying the bills said to. I do think in the end it was faster than doing everything from scratch -- we went from start to production in under three months -- missed the deadline by 47 minutes. This included getting lots of hardware working (someone else's job) and emulating someone else's MMI -- which is always tricky. I had to make the product have the look and feel of an earlier model from another vendor. ----- Original Message ----- From: "zathra_70" <> To: <> Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2003 10:26 AM Subject: [68HC12] Re: Duplicating an application with CodeWarrior and Processor Expert > I have never been able to get a project to copy correctly either - and > I don't even use Processor Expert (I already are one, heh heh). It > always seems to retain a few hooks to the original sources, build > instructions or project settings, so even though everything looks OK, > it isn't. Somewhere in the project there are absolute paths, so even > though it looks like you are editting those copied files on relative > paths, you are really editting the originals. Have to create a new > project each time, then copy all the files over (except those that > have even the remotest connection with project configuration) and then > individually add each of them to the new project (won't even allow an > add with *.c). I got very frustrated with the CodeWarrior and had a > good long look at GNU. But I can't take the code size hit from GNU (up > to 50% larger). So I live with it (Hate the IDE/project system but > love the code- gotta go with the code). > > If you find a way. let us all know.

Daniel, It sounds like a plan. By all means send more details and links. -z --- In , Daniel Quinz <danq@a...> wrote: > Hi Zathra, > > I too hate working with IDE/Project type interfaces as I find them fairly > inflexible and onerous to manipulate. > > Recently, I found an *excellent* alternative to using IDE interfaces. > > I have downloaded the free tool FTJam which is a replacement for the > traditional > 'make' tool. It is much more powerfull and extremely flexible. With it, I > have created a 'standard' template file which I use for all my projects. I > simply change some macros which define the compiler, linker, librarian, etc. > for each > particular chip-set (hc12, pic, etc.) and the rest of the file remains the > same. > > At the DOS window command prompt, I just type 'jam' and all the files are > built correctly. Unlike make, JAM has built-in header file checking, so the > problem > of nested includes is handled. No need for 'makedepend'. > > I have also downloaded Cygwin (also free) which provides a *very* nice Linux > like > environment, complete with a full-screen DOS window replacement which allows > me to > view much more of my source code when editing. > > I have setup the Imagecraft ICC12 compiler to work under this environment > quite nicely and now enjoy the comfort and flexibility of a tradional UNIX > type build environment. > > If this is of interest to you (or anyone else reading this), let me know and > I'll > get more details to you. > > Cheers, > > Daniel Quinz > > Acacetus Inc. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: zathra_70 [mailto:zathra_70@y...] > > Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2003 10:27 AM > > To: > > Subject: [68HC12] Re: Duplicating an application with CodeWarrior and > > Processor Expert > > > > > > I have never been able to get a project to copy correctly either - and > > I don't even use Processor Expert (I already are one, heh heh). It > > always seems to retain a few hooks to the original sources, build > > instructions or project settings, so even though everything looks OK, > > it isn't. Somewhere in the project there are absolute paths, so even > > though it looks like you are editting those copied files on relative > > paths, you are really editting the originals. Have to create a new > > project each time, then copy all the files over (except those that > > have even the remotest connection with project configuration) and then > > individually add each of them to the new project (won't even allow an > > add with *.c). I got very frustrated with the CodeWarrior and had a > > good long look at GNU. But I can't take the code size hit from GNU (up > > to 50% larger). So I live with it (Hate the IDE/project system but > > love the code- gotta go with the code). > > > > If you find a way. let us all know. > > > > > > --- In , "Robert L. Harris" <bob@m...> wrote: > > > We just completed a project using CodeWarrior and Processor Expert. > > Now we > > > are starting a project for a sister product (95% the same). I have tried > > > several ways to make a copy of the original project but none of them > > "copy" > > > or retain the PE stationary. > > > > > > Is there a way of doing this or am I reduced to re-entering all the > > PE beans > > > etc? > > > > > > > > -------------------- > > > > > > > > ">http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ > > > > > >

Hi Daniel -- Do you have link for FTJam? Thanks-- 607-656-2597 -----Original Message----- From: Daniel Quinz [mailto:] Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2003 10:57 AM To: Subject: RE: [68HC12] Re: Duplicating an application with CodeWarrior and Processor Expert Hi Zathra, I too hate working with IDE/Project type interfaces as I find them fairly inflexible and onerous to manipulate. Recently, I found an *excellent* alternative to using IDE interfaces. I have downloaded the free tool FTJam which is a replacement for the traditional 'make' tool. It is much more powerfull and extremely flexible. With it, I have created a 'standard' template file which I use for all my projects. I simply change some macros which define the compiler, linker, librarian, etc. for each particular chip-set (hc12, pic, etc.) and the rest of the file remains the same. At the DOS window command prompt, I just type 'jam' and all the files are built correctly. Unlike make, JAM has built-in header file checking, so the problem of nested includes is handled. No need for 'makedepend'. I have also downloaded Cygwin (also free) which provides a *very* nice Linux like environment, complete with a full-screen DOS window replacement which allows me to view much more of my source code when editing. I have setup the Imagecraft ICC12 compiler to work under this environment quite nicely and now enjoy the comfort and flexibility of a tradional UNIX type build environment. If this is of interest to you (or anyone else reading this), let me know and I'll get more details to you. Cheers, Daniel Quinz Acacetus Inc. > -----Original Message----- > From: zathra_70 [mailto:] > Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2003 10:27 AM > To: > Subject: [68HC12] Re: Duplicating an application with CodeWarrior and > Processor Expert > I have never been able to get a project to copy correctly either - and > I don't even use Processor Expert (I already are one, heh heh). It > always seems to retain a few hooks to the original sources, build > instructions or project settings, so even though everything looks OK, > it isn't. Somewhere in the project there are absolute paths, so even > though it looks like you are editting those copied files on relative > paths, you are really editting the originals. Have to create a new > project each time, then copy all the files over (except those that > have even the remotest connection with project configuration) and then > individually add each of them to the new project (won't even allow an > add with *.c). I got very frustrated with the CodeWarrior and had a > good long look at GNU. But I can't take the code size hit from GNU (up > to 50% larger). So I live with it (Hate the IDE/project system but > love the code- gotta go with the code). > > If you find a way. let us all know. > --- In , "Robert L. Harris" <bob@m...> wrote: > > We just completed a project using CodeWarrior and Processor Expert. > Now we > > are starting a project for a sister product (95% the same). I have > > tried several ways to make a copy of the original project but none > > of them > "copy" > > or retain the PE stationary. > > > > Is there a way of doing this or am I reduced to re-entering all the > PE beans > > etc? > > -------------------- > > ">http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ > -------------------- ">http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

I erred on the original project and followed company procedures for naming the function contianing main() and the project (use the 6-digit part number). CodeWarrior then used that root number for its internal files. Creating a different target as you suggested would retain the file names for the first product. That would be a violation of company procedures. If I just export from the original product and import into the second product, I get working files. And of course I can change the names of the files but I lose the "Processor Expert" stuff. Another unfortunate circumstance: I have to be able to switch between a 112-pin DP256 on the brass board (which I use for testing) and an 80-pin A256 (which the hardware guys use in the prototypes and production). ----- Original Message ----- From: "John Theofanopoulos" <> To: <> Sent: Monday, June 23, 2003 5:13 PM Subject: RE: [68HC12] Duplicating an application with CodeWarrior and Processor Expert > Robert, > > Why don't you simply create another target? You can then use compiler > directirves to differentiate between the two different targets (and > change the 5% that you want to change). > > John Theofanopoulos > Sr. Electrical Engineer > Texaco Ovonic Battery Systems > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Robert L. Harris [mailto:] > > Sent: Monday, June 23, 2003 5:01 PM > > To: > > Subject: [68HC12] Duplicating an application with CodeWarrior > > and Processor Expert > > > > > > We just completed a project using CodeWarrior and Processor > > Expert. Now we are starting a project for a sister product > > (95% the same). I have tried several ways to make a copy of > > the original project but none of them "copy" or retain the PE > > stationary. > > > > Is there a way of doing this or am I reduced to re-entering > > all the PE beans etc? > > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > ---------------------~--> Looking for the latest Free IT > > White Papers? Visit SearchSecurity.com to access over 500 > > white papers. Get instant access at SearchSecurity.com Today > > http://us.click.yahoo.com/kaEeOB/QLNGAA/titMAA/dN_tlB/TM > > > > -------------------------- > > -------~-> > > > > -------------------- > > > > > > > > ">http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ > > > > > -------------------- > > ">http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Hi Zathra, I too hate working with IDE/Project type interfaces as I find them fairly inflexible and onerous to manipulate. Recently, I found an *excellent* alternative to using IDE interfaces. I have downloaded the free tool FTJam which is a replacement for the traditional 'make' tool. It is much more powerfull and extremely flexible. With it, I have created a 'standard' template file which I use for all my projects. I simply change some macros which define the compiler, linker, librarian, etc. for each particular chip-set (hc12, pic, etc.) and the rest of the file remains the same. At the DOS window command prompt, I just type 'jam' and all the files are built correctly. Unlike make, JAM has built-in header file checking, so the problem of nested includes is handled. No need for 'makedepend'. I have also downloaded Cygwin (also free) which provides a *very* nice Linux like environment, complete with a full-screen DOS window replacement which allows me to view much more of my source code when editing. I have setup the Imagecraft ICC12 compiler to work under this environment quite nicely and now enjoy the comfort and flexibility of a tradional UNIX type build environment. If this is of interest to you (or anyone else reading this), let me know and I'll get more details to you. Cheers, Daniel Quinz Acacetus Inc. > -----Original Message----- > From: zathra_70 [mailto:] > Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2003 10:27 AM > To: > Subject: [68HC12] Re: Duplicating an application with CodeWarrior and > Processor Expert > I have never been able to get a project to copy correctly either - and > I don't even use Processor Expert (I already are one, heh heh). It > always seems to retain a few hooks to the original sources, build > instructions or project settings, so even though everything looks OK, > it isn't. Somewhere in the project there are absolute paths, so even > though it looks like you are editting those copied files on relative > paths, you are really editting the originals. Have to create a new > project each time, then copy all the files over (except those that > have even the remotest connection with project configuration) and then > individually add each of them to the new project (won't even allow an > add with *.c). I got very frustrated with the CodeWarrior and had a > good long look at GNU. But I can't take the code size hit from GNU (up > to 50% larger). So I live with it (Hate the IDE/project system but > love the code- gotta go with the code). > > If you find a way. let us all know. > --- In , "Robert L. Harris" <bob@m...> wrote: > > We just completed a project using CodeWarrior and Processor Expert. > Now we > > are starting a project for a sister product (95% the same). I have tried > > several ways to make a copy of the original project but none of them > "copy" > > or retain the PE stationary. > > > > Is there a way of doing this or am I reduced to re-entering all the > PE beans > > etc? > > -------------------- > > ">http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ >

I have never been able to get a project to copy correctly either - and I don't even use Processor Expert (I already are one, heh heh). It always seems to retain a few hooks to the original sources, build instructions or project settings, so even though everything looks OK, it isn't. Somewhere in the project there are absolute paths, so even though it looks like you are editting those copied files on relative paths, you are really editting the originals. Have to create a new project each time, then copy all the files over (except those that have even the remotest connection with project configuration) and then individually add each of them to the new project (won't even allow an add with *.c). I got very frustrated with the CodeWarrior and had a good long look at GNU. But I can't take the code size hit from GNU (up to 50% larger). So I live with it (Hate the IDE/project system but love the code- gotta go with the code). If you find a way. let us all know. --- In , "Robert L. Harris" <bob@m...> wrote: > We just completed a project using CodeWarrior and Processor Expert. Now we > are starting a project for a sister product (95% the same). I have tried > several ways to make a copy of the original project but none of them "copy" > or retain the PE stationary. > > Is there a way of doing this or am I reduced to re-entering all the PE beans > etc?

Robert, Why don't you simply create another target? You can then use compiler directirves to differentiate between the two different targets (and change the 5% that you want to change). John Theofanopoulos Sr. Electrical Engineer Texaco Ovonic Battery Systems > -----Original Message----- > From: Robert L. Harris [mailto:] > Sent: Monday, June 23, 2003 5:01 PM > To: > Subject: [68HC12] Duplicating an application with CodeWarrior > and Processor Expert > We just completed a project using CodeWarrior and Processor > Expert. Now we are starting a project for a sister product > (95% the same). I have tried several ways to make a copy of > the original project but none of them "copy" or retain the PE > stationary. > > Is there a way of doing this or am I reduced to re-entering > all the PE beans etc? > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > ---------------------~--> Looking for the latest Free IT > White Papers? Visit SearchSecurity.com to access over 500 > white papers. Get instant access at SearchSecurity.com Today > http://us.click.yahoo.com/kaEeOB/QLNGAA/titMAA/dN_tlB/TM > > -------------------------- > -------~-> > > -------------------- > > ">http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/