• State Resolved
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 4 replies
  • Subscribers 54 subscribers
  • Views 984 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Support feedback
Options
Options

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.

CCS/TMS320C6678: CCS7.4 cannot find any RTSC product...

canfoderiskii
Expert 2255 points
Part Number: TMS320C6678

Tool/software: Code Composer Studio

OS:Win7 SP1 64bit

CCS: 7.4.0.00015 (installed from offline installer)

After installing the new version of CCS, I opened it and added my RTSC products search path in to CCS as usual. But when I clicked "Rediscover" button, the progress window flashed away very fast and nothing more happens, and no RTSC product is added except the 2 bundles of xdctools which are shipped with CCS.

Any workaround?

  • 0
    TI__Guru**** 451401 points

    Hello,

    canfoderiskii said:
    But when I clicked "Rediscover" button, the progress window flashed away very fast and nothing more happens

    That behavior is odd. After the product discovery is completed, you should get a dialog box with a list of available components. What RTSC products are you trying to install to CCS?

    Also, can you try using a clean new workspace folder?

    Thanks

    ki

  • 0 in reply to Ki
    Expert 2255 points
    The products I want to add are installed from Processor-SDK-c667x-rtos, which works fine with CCS 7.3.0.
    I tried a clean new workspace folder for CCS 7.4.0, problem still exists.
  • 0 in reply to Ki
    Expert 2255 points
    I think I have found the problem.

    I installed Processor-SDK-Vision into the same directory of Processor-SDK-c667x-rtos before, so there is a "uninstall.exe" from PSDK-Vsion in the root of RTSC product search path. If I move that "uninstall.exe" out, then CCS 7.4 can find products correctly.

    I guess this is bug. Even if there are some unrelative files in the root of search path, they should just be ignored anyway.
  • 0 in reply to canfoderiskii
    TI__Guru**** 451401 points
    That is interesting. Thanks for reporting this. We will look into this further