On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 6:13 PM, David MacMahon <dav...@astro.berkeley.edu> wrote: > > This will be helpful! Is there still a distinction or are the two formerly > different levels now considered one and the same? If they are still > distinct, can you please add an indication of which commands are KATCP and > which are tcpborphserver3?
The distinction remains. I am busy writing this up. As a heuristic in the mean time: The commands in the (older) KATCP document which intersect with the ones in the README are in KATCP, the rest are tcpborphserver specific. > FWIW, I think the ?write command now requires a length parameter (not sure > why). Will look into that, that shouldn't be the case > You might also want to mention that the ?fpgastatus command used to be called > ?status in tcpborphserver2. Any chance of re-adding ?status (as an alias for > ?fpgastatus) in the interest of backwards compatibility? I'll add that. regards marc
