Debuger code limit during evaluation intentional?

cancel
Showing results for 
Show  only  | Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Debuger code limit during evaluation intentional?

Jump to solution
1,830 Views
Kopone
Contributor IV

Hi all,

 

I installed the CW 6.3 evaluation version to compile the MQX examples for the Tower system.

The compilation works fine and I can link and flash e.g. the 110k file for the "security webserver" demo without any problems.

However the debugger, after flashing the file, will immediately complain that it is running in demo mode and thus wont load source/symbol files any greater than 64k.

So, I can flash and run the programs but I can not step through them with the debugger. Kinda odd, is this intentional? I also noticed, in the license.dat file, there is a product code "HI409285" for the 30 day eval license, whereas the debugger is complaining about not finding a valid license for "HI409284" (notice the last digit).

 

Regards,

 Sven

Labels (1)
Tags (1)
0 Kudos
Reply
1 Solution
964 Views
J2MEJediMaster
Specialist I

The Special edition of CW for MCUs has a code limit of 64K. The evaluation version should not have a limit. It's sounds like something else might have been installed by accident or was left over from a previous installation. Did you install this over an old CW installation?

 

---Tom

View solution in original post

0 Kudos
Reply
2 Replies
965 Views
J2MEJediMaster
Specialist I

The Special edition of CW for MCUs has a code limit of 64K. The evaluation version should not have a limit. It's sounds like something else might have been installed by accident or was left over from a previous installation. Did you install this over an old CW installation?

 

---Tom

0 Kudos
Reply
964 Views
Kopone
Contributor IV

Ah, yeah, I also got a (daily use) 6.2 SE installation sitting on my harddisk. The two seem to happily coexist, so I guess the debugger issue is a mere side-effect of this. I meanwhile requested a test period extension license and with that one the debugger works. Turns out we gotta upgrade to the 5225x for our current project, so thanks anyways (and blame on me I didnt mention the 6.2 installation right away :manhappy: )

 

Regards,

 Sven

0 Kudos
Reply