FPGA Central

What do you folks use as a command line shell in Windows? I know
several people are working outside of Project Navigator (Xilinx) for
builds and it Windows is just not a very comforting environment for
shell folks. What 'make' utility do you use?

Jake

I don't use the Navigator. I just make little batch files and execute them
from the command line. I'm told that the Cygwin environment is very nice;
it allows Unix-like shells on Windows, but I haven't tried it.
-Kevin

"Jake Janovetz" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected] om...
> What do you folks use as a command line shell in Windows? I know
> several people are working outside of Project Navigator (Xilinx) for
> builds and it Windows is just not a very comforting environment for
> shell folks. What 'make' utility do you use?
>
> Jake

Jake Janovetz wrote:
> What do you folks use as a command line shell in Windows? I know
> several people are working outside of Project Navigator (Xilinx) for
> builds and it Windows is just not a very comforting environment for
> shell folks. What 'make' utility do you use?

Consider adding linux with dual boot for windows.
Then you can use any shell you like
and the real make.

-- Mike Treseler

In article <[email protected]>,
Mike Treseler <[email protected]> wrote:
>Jake Janovetz wrote:
>> What do you folks use as a command line shell in Windows? I know
>> several people are working outside of Project Navigator (Xilinx) for
>> builds and it Windows is just not a very comforting environment for
>> shell folks. What 'make' utility do you use?
>
>Consider adding linux with dual boot for windows.
>Then you can use any shell you like
>and the real make.

Also, cygwin is not that bad.


--
Nicholas C. Weaver [email protected]

> What do you folks use as a command line shell in Windows? I know
> several people are working outside of Project Navigator (Xilinx) for
> builds and it Windows is just not a very comforting environment for
> shell folks. What 'make' utility do you use?

CygWin is OK, but it's large and slow. For a faster and smaller unix-like
shell you can consider Msys (from www.mingw.org) or actually Services for
Unix from MS (http://www.microsoft.com/windows/sfu/default.asp). I myself
use GNU make under plain vanilla CMD.EXE. It works fine for me, though it's
a bit annoying that Xilinx changes the command-line options in every single
release of their toolchain.

Regards,
Andras Tantos

> CygWin is OK, but it's large and slow. For a faster and smaller unix-like
> shell you can consider Msys (from www.mingw.org) or actually Services for
> Unix from MS (http://www.microsoft.com/windows/sfu/default.asp). I myself
> use GNU make under plain vanilla CMD.EXE. It works fine for me, though
it's
> a bit annoying that Xilinx changes the command-line options in every
single
> release of their toolchain.

What does 'make' do for you that batch files to run the tools doesn't?

Not being aggressive - just curious in case I am missing out on some labour
saving functionality!

Cheers,

Ken


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.545 / Virus Database: 339 - Release Date: 27/11/2003

Ken wrote:
>
> What does 'make' do for you that batch files to run the tools doesn't?

Nothing, if you don't use a program that generates makefiles.

Modelsim and emacs-vhdl-mode can generate makefiles
to recompile just
the right files in just the right order after
you edit a few.

But it requires having "make" in the path.


-- Mike Treseler

> > CygWin is OK, but it's large and slow. For a faster and smaller
unix-like
> > shell you can consider Msys (from www.mingw.org) or actually Services
for
> > Unix from MS (http://www.microsoft.com/windows/sfu/default.asp). I
myself
> > use GNU make under plain vanilla CMD.EXE. It works fine for me, though
> it's
> > a bit annoying that Xilinx changes the command-line options in every
> single
> > release of their toolchain.
>
> What does 'make' do for you that batch files to run the tools doesn't?
>
> Not being aggressive - just curious in case I am missing out on some
labour
> saving functionality!
>

Not much, since xilinx tools need a complete rebuild of the project if a
single source-file changes. (Due to the 'flattening' of the design.) It buys
some degree of platform independence though. When I gave Linux a try it was
much easier to port my design flow to that platform.

Regards,
Andras Tantos

Jake Janovetz wrote:
> What do you folks use as a command line shell in Windows? I know
> several people are working outside of Project Navigator (Xilinx) for
> builds and it Windows is just not a very comforting environment for
> shell folks. What 'make' utility do you use?
>
> Jake

Cygwin. I can't live with a Windows machine without Cygwin installed. It
has everything a Unix shell has, including tab-completion, history, ...

Gernot

On Thu, 04 Dec 2003 11:24:43 +0100, "Gernot Koch (remove digits from
user)" <[email protected]> wrote:

>Jake Janovetz wrote:
>> What do you folks use as a command line shell in Windows? I know
>> several people are working outside of Project Navigator (Xilinx) for
>> builds and it Windows is just not a very comforting environment for
>> shell folks. What 'make' utility do you use?
>>
>> Jake
>
>Cygwin. I can't live with a Windows machine without Cygwin installed.

Ditto.

> ... including tab-completion, history, ...

The windows command shell also has these features (at least in
contemporary versions of windows).

Tab-completion is disabled by default. Use regedit to change the
value of
HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Microsoft\Command Processor\CompletionChar
from 0 to 9 to enable it.
It's not the same as tab-completion in bash, but it's better than
nothing.

Regards,
Allan.

For one, it buys me time -- I don't have to learn cheesy Windows batch
files and can use something that is far more flexible and platform
independent. Two, it buys integration with the rest of a project. I
can run a complete build that includes FPGA stuff (several variants,
for example), the C code on an embedded processor, and the C code for
Windows/Linux interfaces that may accompany a project.

Unfortunately, most of the Xilinx project has to be rebuilt for any
change anyhow, so you gain less in terms of incremental build as you
do in C projects.

Jake


"Ken" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<retzb.16505$[email protected]>...
> What does 'make' do for you that batch files to run the tools doesn't?
>
> Not being aggressive - just curious in case I am missing out on some labour
> saving functionality!
>
> Cheers,
>
> Ken
>

Yes, I've used Cygwin extensively for years and like it very much. I
was curious if there was a tolerable 100%-Windows environment.


"Kevin Neilson" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<2mpzb.292233$275.1013866@attbi_s53>...
> I don't use the Navigator. I just make little batch files and execute them
> from the command line. I'm told that the Cygwin environment is very nice;
> it allows Unix-like shells on Windows, but I haven't tried it.
> -Kevin

Mike Treseler <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> Consider adding linux with dual boot for windows.
> Then you can use any shell you like
> and the real make.

Yes, with the new tools usable under Linux, I've considered moving
back there. I use Linux under VMWare for a lot of stuff, I just
haven't moved my FPGA work back. Maybe that's what I should do...

"Jake Janovetz" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected] om...
> What do you folks use as a command line shell in Windows? I know
> several people are working outside of Project Navigator (Xilinx) for
> builds and it Windows is just not a very comforting environment for
> shell folks. What 'make' utility do you use?
>

For Window$ Explorer sustitution: Windows Commander (can't live without it)

Cheers

Klaus