Maybe I don't understand what you are getting at. Why go through all the effort of breaking the software up between BBB and a Windows machine? Why not just remote in to the BBB and call it a day?
On Sat, Sep 19, 2015, 11:59 AM John Dammeyer <jo...@autoartisans.com> wrote: > > On 19/09/15 05:55, John Dammeyer wrote: > > > WIN-8 and up don't support > > > parallel ports or even serial ports directly. > > > > 64bit windows does not support parallel port. Even on 32bit W10 it still > > works fine ... I have some legacy kit which is still going strong but we > > had to move off 32bit XP for some spurious reason ;) Running a couple of > > serial ports as well, but I think they are OK on the 64bit builds as > well. > > > > -- > > Lester Caine - G8HFL > Ah, I didn't realize if you stayed 32 bit that support was still there. > > However, your previous posting about cross platform movement of LinuxCNC to > the Windows environment is interesting. > > The argument against it has always been that: > a) hard real time is possible with Linux and isn't with Windows > b) low level access to the hardware allows closed loop servo control with > expansion cards like MESA for servo's or steppers. > > So given the cost of a MESA or other expansion boards perhaps a tightly > coupled system using a BeagleBone Black (BBB) with a cape as the real time > component and on a windows platform starts to make sense. The BBB has both > USB and Ethernet. Also a lot more I/O if you don't use the HDMI video > capability. > > One doesn't even have to move it to Windows immediately. It becomes a > 'hardware device' like a what's already out there for LinuxCNC. It's > possible it can even keep the real time components used in the MachineKit > port so it remains a Linux hosted processor. So development and testing > become a two part project. > > 1. Move the motion part of LinuxCNC to the BBB via dedicated Ethernet > tcp/ip. Requires second Ethernet port on workstation PC. Surely 100Mbps > Ethernet can handle data motion and position feedback to LinuxCNC software > for screen updating and G-Code parsing. The Smooth Stepper can do it at a > lower level on the non-real time Windows so Linux should find this easy? > > 2. When that's working and tested, port the LinuxCNC non-hard real time > code to Windows C or C++ (not .NET though) > > There is a big plus to step 2 for the LinuxCNC community. The act of > porting can result in code cleanup of LinuxCNC where normally sections are > left alone because they work and there isn't any pressing need to change > them. So old legacy stuff stays old even though now with experience it > could be improved. > > Perhaps this idea has been bounced around before. But the BBB is not like > the Raspberry PI or the Arduino. It's got an extra couple of 200MHz > hardware processors in addition to the 1GHz ARM. The schematics and > software are all public. The potential for an open source expansion is > mind > boggling. > > John > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > _______________________________________________ > 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
