or put simple a big mess rather than a concerted effort on one my thoughts are that machinekit has gone the 3d printing route and forgot about real machines doing real work but with an attempt to bring things up to date like nml etc . and linuxcnc folks have lost the plot in the real world , so we now have 2 options and a mess in the middle
with the real work of gui's being lost in the ether at the moment , and a loss of direction , so yes John i feel as if everything is dangling by a thread , but the direction or future is unknown ... i'd rather leave everything , and concentrate on fixing whats broke , or what should be their that is not for me either way, theres holes for a good working system. at least for real machines with real uses that work for their living but no doubt the mess will soon unravel and the mud will clear On 2 November 2014 16:29, Jon Elson <el...@pico-systems.com> wrote: > On 11/02/2014 09:18 AM, John Alexander Stewart wrote: > > Can someone tell me what the eventual plans for Machinekit and LinuxCNC > is? > > > > Are the two forks going to come together again? > > > > I really like LinuxCNC, and I really like the idea of small, embedded CNC > > controllers, so I'm just wondering. (I have been loosely following the > > machine kit google group; maybe the answer is obvious, but I've missed > it) > > > > > There are not complete forks, never to share code again. A > large part of the reason > for the fork, as I understand it, was to break free from the > constraints of NML and > its dependence on shared memory, with the only alternative > of massive overhead > when sending the entire memory block across the net every > servo period. > > The machinekit folks have their own system for doing this, > enabling them to break > parts of LinuxCNC to run on different hosts over the net. I > think there is some > disagreement on how this was done, and so the LinuxCNC group > is doing this > a different way, that they think will be more flexible. I > REALLY do not know all > the details of this. But, the machinekit folks have their > scheme working, apparently, > and the LinuxCNC way is not ready yet, I think. > > Also, the machinekit runs with a Xenomai kernel on the > Beagle Bone, and with the > assist from Charles Steinkuehler's PRU code for step > generation, etc. it works > quite well. You can't get much smaller than that! I have > not run a machine with > the beagle/machinekit, but build CRAMPS boards (Also > Charles' design) and it > all seems to work. I just ssh -X into the Beagle, so I have > not explored the > concept of running the GUI on a different CPU. If I was > running a real machine, > the GUI latency might be bothersome. > > Jon > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > _______________________________________________ > Emc-users mailing list > Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
