0

I’m currently integrating MicroPython into my Zephyr-based firmware using the nRF Connect SDK 2.9.0. I’ve encountered a build issue due to duplicate definitions arising from the FATFS implementation. Specifically, there are two different sets of FATFS source files:

  • MicroPython’s FATFS: Located in micropython/lib/oofatfs/ff.c and its corresponding header ff.h.
  • Zephyr’s FATFS: Found in modules/fs/fatfs/ff.c (and the corresponding header) provided by Zephyr.

These two implementations both provide functions such as f_mount(), leading to duplicate symbol errors when I try to build my firmware.

The firmware is relatively complex, so I don't want to break something by using one implementation or the other. Is there a recommended method for resolving these duplicate symbol conflicts? Alternatively, is there a way to isolate one implementation (for example, building MicroPython as a separate static library or “namespacing” its FATFS functions) so that both can coexist without conflict?

Improve this question
Related questions
1
Issues with VSC and nRF Connect SDK Extension
1
nRF SDK: BLE GATT server and interrupts at the same time not working
0
Zephyr RTOS (nRF Connect SDK): are k_msleep() and k_sleep() both non-blocking?
Load 4 more related questions Show fewer related questions

0

Reset to default

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Start asking to get answers

Find the answer to your question by asking.

Ask question

Explore related questions

See similar questions with these tags.