Re: [Emc-users] LinuxCNC and Tormach
> On Tue, 11 Jun 2019 at 20:51, John Dammeyer > wrote: > > > LinuxCNC isn't as easy to change a user interface as MACH3 is so I'm not > > even sure how I'd install and run it even if I did have the code. > > In MACH3 select the menu 'view' load a .set file and get a new user > > interface. The .set file sits in the root folder for MACH3 and the png > > files for the various buttons etc in a folder below that. > > > It's not a lot more difficult in LinuxCNC. > > Open the INI file for your config and change the entry > > DISPLAY = axis > > to > DISPLAY = tklinuxcnc > DISPLAY = gscreen > or > DISPLAY = gmoccapy > to see three alternative UIs. > You can also try touchy, but that needs you to create a touchy.hal file > (which is meant to connect the mandatory jog wheel for that interface) > Hi Andy, I got the drift of that from reading the web page on the various screens and user interfaces I'll probably take a stab at that later this week since I'm still having encoder noise issues with both US Digital and CUI encoders on the DC Brushed motors. Waiting for parts from Digikey to proceed on that. And my MESA board won't be here for some time yet. While I'm waiting for parts I'll put together another STMBL so I can configure it for DC Servo and track down if the problem is the encoders/motor combination or HP_UHU with these motors and encoders. Then once the hardware works go back to setting up the MESA instead of PC parallel ports in order to get the 55kHz step rate I need for X and Y. John ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
Re: [Emc-users] LinuxCNC and Tormach
On Tue, 11 Jun 2019 at 20:51, John Dammeyer wrote: > LinuxCNC isn't as easy to change a user interface as MACH3 is so I'm not > even sure how I'd install and run it even if I did have the code. > In MACH3 select the menu 'view' load a .set file and get a new user > interface. The .set file sits in the root folder for MACH3 and the png > files for the various buttons etc in a folder below that. It's not a lot more difficult in LinuxCNC. Open the INI file for your config and change the entry DISPLAY = axis to DISPLAY = tklinuxcnc DISPLAY = gscreen or DISPLAY = gmoccapy to see three alternative UIs. You can also try touchy, but that needs you to create a touchy.hal file (which is meant to connect the mandatory jog wheel for that interface) -- atp "A motorcycle is a bicycle with a pandemonium attachment and is designed for the especial use of mechanical geniuses, daredevils and lunatics." — George Fitch, Atlanta Constitution Newspaper, 1916 ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
Re: [Emc-users] LinuxCNC and Tormach
Legal jargon? If PP uses the LinuxCNC engine to accomplish the task of running their equipment then IMHO, "aggregate" is a joke. Their PP couldn't exist by itself and be useful running hardware without LinuxCNC and the tens of thousands of hours of development that brought LinuxCNC up from nothing so many years ago is used to help a company sell equipment. But it sounds like it's available to some developers so moot point I guess. But truthfully I don't care. Don't know if I want the PP interface because I don't know how ot try it out. LinuxCNC isn't as easy to change a user interface as MACH3 is so I'm not even sure how I'd install and run it even if I did have the code. In MACH3 select the menu 'view' load a .set file and get a new user interface. The .set file sits in the root folder for MACH3 and the png files for the various buttons etc in a folder below that. Is it as extensible as LinuxCNC? I doubt it. LinuxCNC in the long run is way more versatile. Is MACH3 easier to use to try different interfaces? Without a doubt. John > -Original Message- > From: Chris Albertson [mailto:albertson.ch...@gmail.com] > Sent: June-11-19 12:14 PM > To: Sebastian Kuzminsky; Enhanced Machine Controller (EMC) > Subject: Re: [Emc-users] LinuxCNC and Tormach > > Path Pilot is what GNU calls an "aggregate�. This is why I pointed > out about the address space. Because GNU makes a distinction based > on that. > The software Tormach delivers is an aggregate and some of it is > covered by GPL, some of it not covered. Tormach claims there user > interface is a separate program that uses a standard interface to > Linux CNC. I don't have PP so I can't examine. > > But if you have a running copy, look and see how the data is > exchanged. Is it via a standard interface like g-code or it is a > large complex shared data structure? > > QUOTE from gnu.org web site follows > > > What is the difference between an �aggregate� and other kinds of > �modified versions�? (#MereAggregation) > > An �aggregate� consists of a number of separate programs, distributed > together on the same CD-ROM or other media. The GPL permits you to > create and distribute an aggregate, even when the licenses of the > other software are nonfree or GPL-incompatible. The only condition is > that you cannot release the aggregate under a license that prohibits > users from exercising rights that each program's individual license > would grant them. > > Where's the line between two separate programs, and one program with > two parts? This is a legal question, which ultimately judges will > decide. We believe that a proper criterion depends both on the > mechanism of communication (exec, pipes, rpc, function calls within a > shared address space, etc.) and the semantics of the communication > (what kinds of information are interchanged). > > If the modules are included in the same executable file, they are > definitely combined in one program. If modules are designed to run > linked together in a shared address space, that almost surely means > combining them into one program. > > By contrast, pipes, sockets and command-line arguments are > communication mechanisms normally used between two separate programs. > So when they are used for communication, the modules normally are > separate programs. But if the semantics of the communication are > intimate enough, exchanging complex internal data structures, that too > could be a basis to consider the two parts as combined into a larger > program. > > On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 11:45 AM Sebastian Kuzminsky > wrote: > > > > On 6/11/19 11:33 AM, Chris Albertson wrote: > > > Was Path Pilot linked into the LinuxCNC address space? > > > > To be clear, LinuxCNC is a multi-process application, so there are > > several address spaces, not just one. > > > > Path Pilot is a Python application that imports several python modules > > that are part of LinuxCNC (the module are: linuxcnc, hal, and gremlin). > > These LinuxCNC python modules are required in order to interface to the > > LinuxCNC motion controller, and exchange commands, status, and error > > information. > > > > > > > To be a derivative work it must be running in the same address > > > space. If PP runs as a different process it is not covered by GPL. > > > > I disagree. > > > > From the GNU FAQ, > > https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0- > faq.html#MereAggregation: > > > > > ... if the semantics of the communication are intimate enough, exchanging > > > complex internal data structures, that too could be a basis to &g
Re: [Emc-users] LinuxCNC and Tormach
On 6/11/19 1:14 PM, Chris Albertson wrote: Path Pilot is what GNU calls an "aggregate”. This is why I pointed out about the address space. Because GNU makes a distinction based on that. The software Tormach delivers is an aggregate and some of it is covered by GPL, some of it not covered. Tormach claims there user interface is a separate program that uses a standard interface to Linux CNC. I don't have PP so I can't examine. But if you have a running copy, look and see how the data is exchanged. Is it via a standard interface like g-code or it is a large complex shared data structure? QUOTE from gnu.org web site follows What is the difference between an “aggregate” and other kinds of “modified versions”? (#MereAggregation) An “aggregate” consists of a number of separate programs, distributed together on the same CD-ROM or other media. The GPL permits you to create and distribute an aggregate, even when the licenses of the other software are nonfree or GPL-incompatible. The only condition is that you cannot release the aggregate under a license that prohibits users from exercising rights that each program's individual license would grant them. Where's the line between two separate programs, and one program with two parts? This is a legal question, which ultimately judges will decide. We believe that a proper criterion depends both on the mechanism of communication (exec, pipes, rpc, function calls within a shared address space, etc.) and the semantics of the communication (what kinds of information are interchanged). If the modules are included in the same executable file, they are definitely combined in one program. If modules are designed to run linked together in a shared address space, that almost surely means combining them into one program. By contrast, pipes, sockets and command-line arguments are communication mechanisms normally used between two separate programs. So when they are used for communication, the modules normally are separate programs. But if the semantics of the communication are intimate enough, exchanging complex internal data structures, that too could be a basis to consider the two parts as combined into a larger program. The above quote that you sent me is the text of the link i just sent you. I quoted you the last part of that, which i believe supports my position. The "semantics of the communication" are a domain-specific message-passing protocol that's used only by the LinuxCNC motion controller to communicate with the user interfaces. It is intimately tied to LinuxCNC, and has no possible application anywhere else. It is not limited to g-code, but carries a huge variety of machine control messages and configuration/setup messages for the LinuxCNC Motion controller. All these messages are specific to LinuxCNC, and LinuxCNC can't work without them. Since this interface library is a core part of LinuxCNC and has no utility without LinuxCNC, this makes anything using this library a derivative work of LinuxCNC. IMO, but IANAL. On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 11:45 AM Sebastian Kuzminsky wrote: On 6/11/19 11:33 AM, Chris Albertson wrote: Was Path Pilot linked into the LinuxCNC address space? To be clear, LinuxCNC is a multi-process application, so there are several address spaces, not just one. Path Pilot is a Python application that imports several python modules that are part of LinuxCNC (the module are: linuxcnc, hal, and gremlin). These LinuxCNC python modules are required in order to interface to the LinuxCNC motion controller, and exchange commands, status, and error information. To be a derivative work it must be running in the same address space. If PP runs as a different process it is not covered by GPL. I disagree. From the GNU FAQ, https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0-faq.html#MereAggregation: ... if the semantics of the communication are intimate enough, exchanging complex internal data structures, that too could be a basis to consider the two parts as combined into a larger program. -- Sebastian Kuzminsky -- Sebastian Kuzminsky ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
Re: [Emc-users] LinuxCNC and Tormach
Path Pilot is what GNU calls an "aggregate”. This is why I pointed out about the address space. Because GNU makes a distinction based on that. The software Tormach delivers is an aggregate and some of it is covered by GPL, some of it not covered. Tormach claims there user interface is a separate program that uses a standard interface to Linux CNC. I don't have PP so I can't examine. But if you have a running copy, look and see how the data is exchanged. Is it via a standard interface like g-code or it is a large complex shared data structure? QUOTE from gnu.org web site follows What is the difference between an “aggregate” and other kinds of “modified versions”? (#MereAggregation) An “aggregate” consists of a number of separate programs, distributed together on the same CD-ROM or other media. The GPL permits you to create and distribute an aggregate, even when the licenses of the other software are nonfree or GPL-incompatible. The only condition is that you cannot release the aggregate under a license that prohibits users from exercising rights that each program's individual license would grant them. Where's the line between two separate programs, and one program with two parts? This is a legal question, which ultimately judges will decide. We believe that a proper criterion depends both on the mechanism of communication (exec, pipes, rpc, function calls within a shared address space, etc.) and the semantics of the communication (what kinds of information are interchanged). If the modules are included in the same executable file, they are definitely combined in one program. If modules are designed to run linked together in a shared address space, that almost surely means combining them into one program. By contrast, pipes, sockets and command-line arguments are communication mechanisms normally used between two separate programs. So when they are used for communication, the modules normally are separate programs. But if the semantics of the communication are intimate enough, exchanging complex internal data structures, that too could be a basis to consider the two parts as combined into a larger program. On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 11:45 AM Sebastian Kuzminsky wrote: > > On 6/11/19 11:33 AM, Chris Albertson wrote: > > Was Path Pilot linked into the LinuxCNC address space? > > To be clear, LinuxCNC is a multi-process application, so there are > several address spaces, not just one. > > Path Pilot is a Python application that imports several python modules > that are part of LinuxCNC (the module are: linuxcnc, hal, and gremlin). > These LinuxCNC python modules are required in order to interface to the > LinuxCNC motion controller, and exchange commands, status, and error > information. > > > > To be a derivative work it must be running in the same address > > space. If PP runs as a different process it is not covered by GPL. > > I disagree. > > From the GNU FAQ, > https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0-faq.html#MereAggregation: > > > ... if the semantics of the communication are intimate enough, exchanging > > complex internal data structures, that too could be a basis to > > consider the two parts as combined into a larger program. > > > > -- > Sebastian Kuzminsky -- Chris Albertson Redondo Beach, California ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
Re: [Emc-users] LinuxCNC and Tormach
On Tue, 11 Jun 2019 at 16:32, John Dammeyer wrote: That's what I thought after reading through the link I posted (to the > various possible user interfaces). From the looks of it one could even use > a programming language like Lazarus Object Pascal to serve up the user > interface as long as it was able to interface with the LinuxCNC libraries. FWIW the UI that Gmoccapy was based on (moccagui) was written in FreePascal / Lazarus https://www.cnc.info.pl/mocca-dla-emc2-t29013.html -- atp "A motorcycle is a bicycle with a pandemonium attachment and is designed for the especial use of mechanical geniuses, daredevils and lunatics." — George Fitch, Atlanta Constitution Newspaper, 1916 ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
Re: [Emc-users] LinuxCNC and Tormach
> On 6/10/19 11:36 PM, Chris Albertson wrote: > > No. Path Pilot is not LinuxCNC. and not covered by GPL. Path Pilot > > is a Linux application that creates G-code that is then sent to > > LinuxCNC. > > > > Only if PP was a modified version of LinuxCNC then it would be GPL's > > but it is not, they are two different bits of software that run on the > > same machine. Yes, they are distributed together and run at the same > > time but they are not linked into one executable file. > > Last time i checked (which was in 2015 some time I think) PathPilot was > a modified version of LinuxCNC which included a new GUI, using the > standard LinuxCNC UI libraries to interface with the rest of LinuxCNC. > > As such both parts (the modified motion controller and the new GUI) are > what the Free Software Foundation calls "derivative work", and both are > covered by the GPL. > > I believe Tormach agrees with this assessment, and they have send their > source code to me and to other LinuxCNC developers. > > > -- > Sebastian Kuzminsky > Thanks Sebastian, That's what I thought after reading through the link I posted (to the various possible user interfaces). From the looks of it one could even use a programming language like Lazarus Object Pascal to serve up the user interface as long as it was able to interface with the LinuxCNC libraries. That's what's done with the user interfaces that are written in Python. Just haven't had the time yet to dig further. John ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
Re: [Emc-users] LinuxCNC and Tormach
On 6/10/19 11:36 PM, Chris Albertson wrote: No. Path Pilot is not LinuxCNC. and not covered by GPL. Path Pilot is a Linux application that creates G-code that is then sent to LinuxCNC. Only if PP was a modified version of LinuxCNC then it would be GPL's but it is not, they are two different bits of software that run on the same machine. Yes, they are distributed together and run at the same time but they are not linked into one executable file. Last time i checked (which was in 2015 some time I think) PathPilot was a modified version of LinuxCNC which included a new GUI, using the standard LinuxCNC UI libraries to interface with the rest of LinuxCNC. As such both parts (the modified motion controller and the new GUI) are what the Free Software Foundation calls "derivative work", and both are covered by the GPL. I believe Tormach agrees with this assessment, and they have send their source code to me and to other LinuxCNC developers. -- Sebastian Kuzminsky ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
Re: [Emc-users] LinuxCNC and Tormach
No. Path Pilot is not LinuxCNC. and not covered by GPL. Path Pilot is a Linux application that creates G-code that is then sent to LinuxCNC. Only if PP was a modified version of LinuxCNC then it would be GPL's but it is not, they are two different bits of software that run on the same machine. Yes, they are distributed together and run at the same time but they are not linked into one executable file. On Mon, Jun 10, 2019 at 2:38 PM John Dammeyer wrote: > > Got a Design World mailing today with an advertisement for Tormach Path Pilot > titled the brains behind CNC. And a link to this video. > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=puZednzlsY0 > > In the comments section an answer to a request about replacing MACH3 with > Path Pilot was that if you own a Tormach yes but if not, then no. > > Since Tormach makes extensive use of LinuxCNC to sell their product, does > that not mean that they are required to release their Path Pilot? > > John > > > > > ___ > Emc-users mailing list > Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users -- Chris Albertson Redondo Beach, California ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
Re: [Emc-users] LinuxCNC and Tormach
There was some discussion about this on cnczone and I believe that the conclusion was that they would send the files to anyone. Go to https://www.tormach.com/store/index.php?app=ecom=prodshow=38249 if you want to order your personal copy. > -Original Message- > From: John Dammeyer [mailto:jo...@autoartisans.com] > Sent: Monday, June 10, 2019 7:20 PM > To: 'Enhanced Machine Controller (EMC)' > Subject: Re: [Emc-users] LinuxCNC and Tormach > > > -Original Message- > > From: Ken Strauss [mailto:ken.stra...@gmail.com] > > Sent: June-10-19 3:19 PM > > To: 'Enhanced Machine Controller (EMC)' > > Subject: Re: [Emc-users] LinuxCNC and Tormach > > > > I neglected to answer you other question: > > Tormach's Python source files are on every distribution flashdrive (the > > distribution is too big for a DVD). For a small fee ($25?) Tormach will send > > all source files on a DVD. > > > > Ah but probably only to registered users? > This sort of thing could easily be put online. > > There are various screen sets for LinuxCNC. > http://linuxcnc.org/docs/html/user/user-intro.html#_modes_of_operation > > Just curious why the Tormach one isn't up there I guess. > John > > > > > -Original Message- > > > From: John Dammeyer [mailto:jo...@autoartisans.com] > > > Sent: Monday, June 10, 2019 5:37 PM > > > To: 'Enhanced Machine Controller (EMC)' > > > Subject: [Emc-users] LinuxCNC and Tormach > > > > > > Got a Design World mailing today with an advertisement for Tormach Path > > > Pilot titled the brains behind CNC. And a link to this video. > > > > > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=puZednzlsY0 > > > > > > In the comments section an answer to a request about replacing MACH3 > with > > > Path Pilot was that if you own a Tormach yes but if not, then no. > > > > > > Since Tormach makes extensive use of LinuxCNC to sell their product, does > > > that not mean that they are required to release their Path Pilot? > > > > > > 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 > > > > ___ > 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
Re: [Emc-users] LinuxCNC and Tormach
> -Original Message- > From: Ken Strauss [mailto:ken.stra...@gmail.com] > Sent: June-10-19 3:19 PM > To: 'Enhanced Machine Controller (EMC)' > Subject: Re: [Emc-users] LinuxCNC and Tormach > > I neglected to answer you other question: > Tormach's Python source files are on every distribution flashdrive (the > distribution is too big for a DVD). For a small fee ($25?) Tormach will send > all source files on a DVD. > Ah but probably only to registered users? This sort of thing could easily be put online. There are various screen sets for LinuxCNC. http://linuxcnc.org/docs/html/user/user-intro.html#_modes_of_operation Just curious why the Tormach one isn't up there I guess. John > > -Original Message- > > From: John Dammeyer [mailto:jo...@autoartisans.com] > > Sent: Monday, June 10, 2019 5:37 PM > > To: 'Enhanced Machine Controller (EMC)' > > Subject: [Emc-users] LinuxCNC and Tormach > > > > Got a Design World mailing today with an advertisement for Tormach Path > > Pilot titled the brains behind CNC. And a link to this video. > > > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=puZednzlsY0 > > > > In the comments section an answer to a request about replacing MACH3 with > > Path Pilot was that if you own a Tormach yes but if not, then no. > > > > Since Tormach makes extensive use of LinuxCNC to sell their product, does > > that not mean that they are required to release their Path Pilot? > > > > 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 ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
Re: [Emc-users] LinuxCNC and Tormach
I neglected to answer you other question: Tormach's Python source files are on every distribution flashdrive (the distribution is too big for a DVD). For a small fee ($25?) Tormach will send all source files on a DVD. > -Original Message- > From: John Dammeyer [mailto:jo...@autoartisans.com] > Sent: Monday, June 10, 2019 5:37 PM > To: 'Enhanced Machine Controller (EMC)' > Subject: [Emc-users] LinuxCNC and Tormach > > Got a Design World mailing today with an advertisement for Tormach Path > Pilot titled the brains behind CNC. And a link to this video. > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=puZednzlsY0 > > In the comments section an answer to a request about replacing MACH3 with > Path Pilot was that if you own a Tormach yes but if not, then no. > > Since Tormach makes extensive use of LinuxCNC to sell their product, does > that not mean that they are required to release their Path Pilot? > > 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
Re: [Emc-users] LinuxCNC and Tormach
As a Tormach owner for a number of years: My machine came with Mach3 installed. Perhaps 3 years ago all owners were emailed an upgrade notice suggesting that PathPilot was great and that an upgrade required the purchase of a Mesa 5i25 card + an install DVD costing a total of a little more than $100. It is not official but a Mesa 7i92 now also works with no PP user modifications required. There have been no upgrades/bug fixes to Mach3 since the initial release of PP although there have been numerous upgrades to PP. There is no pressure to change to PP if one is happy with Mach3. That said, it has been made clear that there will be no further upgrades to Mach3. In addition, newer Tormach machines such as PCNC440, the new servo based PCNC770MX and PCNC1100MX and RapidTurn are not supported in Mach3. Please feel free to ask questions if the above is unclear. I have been a PP user since their beta. > -Original Message- > From: John Dammeyer [mailto:jo...@autoartisans.com] > Sent: Monday, June 10, 2019 5:37 PM > To: 'Enhanced Machine Controller (EMC)' > Subject: [Emc-users] LinuxCNC and Tormach > > Got a Design World mailing today with an advertisement for Tormach Path > Pilot titled the brains behind CNC. And a link to this video. > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=puZednzlsY0 > > In the comments section an answer to a request about replacing MACH3 with > Path Pilot was that if you own a Tormach yes but if not, then no. > > Since Tormach makes extensive use of LinuxCNC to sell their product, does > that not mean that they are required to release their Path Pilot? > > 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
[Emc-users] LinuxCNC and Tormach
Got a Design World mailing today with an advertisement for Tormach Path Pilot titled the brains behind CNC. And a link to this video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=puZednzlsY0 In the comments section an answer to a request about replacing MACH3 with Path Pilot was that if you own a Tormach yes but if not, then no. Since Tormach makes extensive use of LinuxCNC to sell their product, does that not mean that they are required to release their Path Pilot? John ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
