Skip to content

Conversation

@ohagendorf
Copy link
Contributor

{
"daplink_build": "Feb 19 2016 10:50:08",
"daplink_url": "http://mbed.org/device/?code=08170221052460673A60F94D",
"daplink_version": "0221",
"mount_point": "F:",
"platform_name": "DISCO_F769NI",
"platform_name_unique": "DISCO_F769NI[0]",
"serial_port": "COM30",
"target_id": "08170221052460673A60F94D",
"target_id_mbed_htm": "08170221052460673A60F94D",
"target_id_usb_id": "0672FF485457725187124414"
}

{
    "daplink_build": "Feb 19 2016 10:50:08",
    "daplink_url": "http://mbed.org/device/?code=08170221052460673A60F94D",
    "daplink_version": "0221",
    "mount_point": "F:",
    "platform_name": "DISCO_F769NI",
    "platform_name_unique": "DISCO_F769NI[0]",
    "serial_port": "COM30",
    "target_id": "08170221052460673A60F94D",
    "target_id_mbed_htm": "08170221052460673A60F94D",
    "target_id_usb_id": "0672FF485457725187124414"
}
@PrzemekWirkus
Copy link
Contributor

@sg- please review. @mazimkhan please merge if Sam approves and release mbed-ls with new platforms!

@sg-
Copy link
Contributor

sg- commented Aug 8, 2016

The online database calls it DISCO-F769I

@ohagendorf What needs to be updated? The database or this PR?

@ohagendorf
Copy link
Contributor Author

Up to now as a target name in mbed Disco+mcu name (without STM32) was used. The official STM product names differs in many cases.
That's why I used F769NI because the mcu name is STM32F769NI.
The product name is STM32F769I-DISCO.

@sg-
Copy link
Contributor

sg- commented Aug 8, 2016

I've updated the online database to be DISCO-F769NI

LGTM 👍

@mazimkhan mazimkhan merged commit c7b78ae into ARMmbed:master Aug 10, 2016
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants