Lpc2000

I asked ARM if I could get access to the RDI specifications, and got a "no". I 
didn't ask to have it for free, but I said that I wanted to use it for my 
open source debugger (OpenOCD).
I asked if there would be licensing issues when using RDI in an open product 
(there's enough information publicly available to get RDI working), and got a 
"sorry can't help".

I want to support it, but I can't. By your definition, that makes RDI a closed 
standard.

Regards,

Dominic

On Thursday 19 January 2006 16:06, derbaier wrote:
> --- In lpc2000@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Curtis" <plc@r...> wrote:
> > RDI is open in the sense that it's "open to all those that pay the
> > entrance fee."  I find it hard to call that "open."
> >
> > --
> > Paul Curtis, Rowley Associates Ltd  http://www.rowley.co.uk
> > CrossWorks for MSP430, ARM, AVR and now MAXQ processors
>
> I can appreciate your point of view, but 'open' in the standards sense
> has never been the same as 'free'.  So you may find it hard to call it
> 'open', but that difficulty does not alter the fact that anyone who
> wants to can support the standard.
>
> -- Dave