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: CCS Environment Cleanup: Best Practices?

Tool/software: Code Composer Studio

CCS Friends,

Having worked through several iterations of CCS over a couple of years, and having accumulated many versions of many SDKs and TI-RTOS versions, I'd like to now know how best to clean up potentially unused stuff. Along the way, I've accumulated many example applications, in addition to applications we've authored ourselves - so I'm guessing it's not an easy task to determine which packages might still be referenced?

1) Is there a technique for perhaps(?) scanning a workspace to determine which SDKs are actually being referenced? (Instead of checking each project by hand?)

2) To actually delete an SDK, is simply dragging to trash and restarting an adequate approach?

  • Hi LouEEE,

    LouEEEE! said:
    1) Is there a technique for perhaps(?) scanning a workspace to determine which SDKs are actually being referenced? (Instead of checking each project by hand?)

    Unfortunately, no. Well, you can see which products are "discovered" and "installed" by CCS:

    But this just means that these products are available to be used with CCS. It doesn't mean that any project in the workspace actually use them.

    So... yeah I guess you need to check each project to see which products are being used.

    LouEEEE! said:
    2) To actually delete an SDK, is simply dragging to trash and restarting an adequate approach?

    Yeah that basically works. If you delete the folder, CCS will detect that it is gone and resolve it. You may have to restart CCS.

    Personally, I like to use any uninstall option if available. For example, if you installed it in the new Resource Explorer, the best thing to do is to uninstall it from there also:

    It is a bit "cleaner" to do it this way. But I don't think it is required.

    Thanks

    ki

  • Thanks, Ki,

    For the quick response - (which is roughly the one I expected!) Was hoping for a more robust/comprehensive solution, but... OK.

    Lou