Alex Joni wrote:
> Not necessarely. I added a flag to AXIS a while ago to not export HAL pins.
> It was added in order to run AXIS on a remote computer (not the one with RT
> and HAL).
> Haven't tried in a while, so if it doesn't work currently it's probably
> because some new pins have been adde
> Jeff Epler wrote:
>> Finally, some of the user interfaces (AXIS, Touchy) are also HAL
>> components because this gives them some advantages in systems with
>> physical control panels such as jog switches or jogwheels, so they have
>> to run on the same system as realtime.
>>
>>
> Indeed, I probab
Jeff Epler wrote:
> Finally, some of the user interfaces (AXIS, Touchy) are also HAL
> components because this gives them some advantages in systems with
> physical control panels such as jog switches or jogwheels, so they have
> to run on the same system as realtime.
>
>
Indeed, I probably had
emc's userspace is mostly POSIX, but as nobody runs emc on non-linux
systems it's certain that many linux-specific items have crept in.
emc's realtime system has a portability layer, RTAPI. However, realtime
drivers (particularly hardware drivers) also use linux kernel APIs for
device detection a
> .
> For those who are inclined to ask "why bother?", let me point out that
> any answer other than "because I can" is likely to be just so much
> handwaving. I could make up other answers, but... why bother?
>
> [And yes, I'm aware that the RepRap controller software has been
> adapted
Jon Elson writes:
>NIST started on Sun Workstations, and then tried out some of the RT
>extensions to Windows NT, and found them to be horrible.
>Every hour, you could get interruptions up to a second or so. A total
>joke for real time control.
How does Mach3 handle this with current versions o
EBo writes:
>Other than that,
>there are a number of unix specific stuff that will probably require a LOT
>work to replace the underlying functionality.
Can you be more specific? What kinds of things are we talking about? I'm
not so much looking for a full explanation, but for pointers to which
On July 24, 2010 11:50:02 am EBo wrote:
> In the spirit of helping out...
>
> > I see that FreeRTOS has been ported to the x86 platform, and might be a
> > better fit in some ways than linux. Also, if the motion controller were
> > moved to a separate micro controller, there would be no need for a
In the spirit of helping out...
> I see that FreeRTOS has been ported to the x86 platform, and might be a
> better fit in some ways than linux. Also, if the motion controller were
> moved to a separate micro controller, there would be no need for a
> real-time OS (a CPU that only runs one prog
Ron Bean wrote:
> What parts of EMC2 are specific to the Linux OS? Obviously the RTAPI
> stuff, and the LibNML stuff. Anything else?
>
LibNML is not likely to be all that OS specific. Certainly uses
language specific data structure elements.
> What parts of EMC2 are specific to the x86 CPU? HA
Asking mostly out of curiosity at this point, but it seems like it would
be good to know:
What parts of EMC2 are specific to the Linux OS? Obviously the RTAPI
stuff, and the LibNML stuff. Anything else?
What parts of EMC2 are specific to the x86 CPU? HAL is obviously
hardware-specific. Anything e
11 matches
Mail list logo
