Re: Bug#466939: ITP: hex2bin -- Converts Motorola and Intel Hex files to binary
Am Freitag 22 Februar 2008 schrieb Uwe Hermann:
> On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 02:11:44PM +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 12:04:19AM +0100, Uwe Hermann wrote:
> > > Package: wnpp
> > > Severity: wishlist
> > > Owner: Uwe Hermann <email@example.com>
> > >
> > > * Package name : hex2bin
> > > Version : 1.0.6
> > > Upstream Author : Jacques Pelletier
> > > <firstname.lastname@example.org> * URL :
> > > http://sourceforge.net/projects/hex2bin/
> > > * License : GPL
> > > Programming Lang: C
> > > Description : Converts Motorola and Intel Hex files to binary
> > >
> > > Converts Motorola and Intel Hex (*.hex or *.ihx) files to binary.
> > FWIW, you can do this with the srecord package. Despite the name, it
> > reads and writes a bunch of hex formats and binary, and can convert
> > between them and apply various other transformations (address shift, byte
> > swapping) etc.
> > Note that I'm not objecting to your ITP, only proposing an existing
> > solution. hex2bin might be simpler to use, although it could probably be
> > implemented as a simple wrapper script on-top of srecord, and packaged
> > with it. You can do a hex to binary conversion with:
> > srec_cat <infile> -Intel -output <outfile> -Binary
> Yep, I'm aware of srecord, but bin2hex is indeed a bit more simple. One
> of the reasons why I want to package it is that many (AVR) Makefiles out
> there use it to convert *.hex files to *.bin and thus break on Debian
> as we don't yet have bin2hex.
> Sure, they can be fixed to use srecord, but having hex2bin in the
> archive (and not having to modify external scripts/Makefiles) is still
> worthwhile, IMO.
Did you read the part with the wrapper script?
The binary names are way to generic, too (just as the package name).