This thread has been locked.

If you have a related question, please click the "Ask a related question" button in the top right corner. The newly created question will be automatically linked to this question.

can not debug with CCS6.1.1



Hello,

i installed CCS 6.1.1 after i installed the latested SDK for Sitara SK EVM.

i load a simple "Hello Wrold" project, i choose my processor (AM335x) and tried to debug.

it created a file called SKtarget.ccxml.

but when i press the debug button i get the following error:

Unable to load /opt/ti/ccsv6/ccs_base/DebugServer/drivers/JavaToGtiAdapter.dvr: /opt/ti/ccsv6/ccs_base/DebugServer/drivers/JavaToGtiAdapter.dvr: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory

any suggestion what i can do?

P.S.

i'm a newbee with SK EVM and CCS :-)

  • Are you using CCS on a Linux host?

    The file referenced in the message JavaToGtiAdapter.dvr is the name of a driver file in a Windows installation of CCS. The equivalent file name on Linux is libJavaToGTIAdapter.so. 

    If you are using Linux, then CCS is referencing the incorrect Windows driver file .dvr instead of the Linux .so driver file. I will file a bug report to have that corrected.

    This reference is coming from gti_uart_driver.xml which seems to get added to the target configuration file (.ccxml) if you add a UART Connection.  I'm not sure if the default target configuration file generated by CCS added this or if you inadvertently added it. Can you open your .ccxml file and check if there is a UART Connection (as in screenshot below), and if so, try removing it and see if that helps? 

  • AartiG said:
    The file referenced in the message JavaToGtiAdapter.dvr is the name of a driver file in a Windows installation of CCS. The equivalent file name on Linux is libJavaToGTIAdapter.so. 

    There was the previous thread missing JavaToGtiAdapter.dvr which noted that the Linux  ccsv6/ccs_base/common/targetdb/drivers/gti_uart_driver.xml file incorrectly referenced a Windows driver file. Do you know if a defect was raised for this?

  • Chester Gillon said:
    Do you know if a defect was raised for this?

    I don't think a defect was filed earlier (at least I did not find one in my search). I have now filed this as bug # SDSCM00052425.