On Tue, 13 Dec 2022 at 18:59, andy pugh wrote:
joints[joint_num].free_tp.curr_pos = H[joint_num].home; **
> This line is new ***
>
Runtests passes with this fix, FWIW.
--
atp
"A motorcycle is a bicycle with a pandemonium attachment and is designed
for the especial use
On Sat, 10 Dec 2022 at 23:14, Dewey Garrett wrote:
>
> > Is anyone else able to reproduce this behaviour?
>
> $ wget www.panix.com/~dgarrett/stuff/arc.tgz
> $ tar xzf arc.tgz
> $ cd arc
>
Using this test (thanks, up until this point I had been unable to reproduce
the issue) I have been able to
On Sat, 10 Dec 2022 at 23:14, Dewey Garrett wrote:
> a) not reproducible if all joints set immediate homing
> as there are no residual position errors
>
Thanks for that, the original problem description was very garbled but
seemed to be indicating that there was no movement during homing on
lör 2022-12-10 klockan 23:10 + skrev Dewey Garrett:
>
> > Is anyone else able to reproduce this behaviour?
>
> $ wget www.panix.com/~dgarrett/stuff/arc.tgz
> $ tar xzf arc.tgz
> $ cd arc
>
> 1) start from command line
> $ linuxcnc arc.ini
>
> 2) Initialize
> F1 -- Machine on
> F2
If it helps, after following the steps below, I can reproduce everything
described.
-Greg
On Sat, Dec 10, 2022 at 6:14 PM Dewey Garrett wrote:
>
> > Is anyone else able to reproduce this behaviour?
>
> $ wget www.panix.com/~dgarrett/stuff/arc.tgz
> $ tar xzf arc.tgz
> $ cd arc
>
> 1) start
> Is anyone else able to reproduce this behaviour?
$ wget www.panix.com/~dgarrett/stuff/arc.tgz
$ tar xzf arc.tgz
$ cd arc
1) start from command line
$ linuxcnc arc.ini
2) Initialize
F1 -- Machine on
F2 -- Estop off
Ctrl-HOME --- Home all
# Display shows one turn spiral
3)
Searching for "linuxcnc go reference" lands me on a forum page where the
user said go reference then something about reference the axis so I'm
thinking it's homing the axis. The Axis sim is too clever and does a
bunch of moves to simulate a real machine homing but that may be masking
the
Any clue what "go reference" means?
JT
On 12/10/2022 12:53 PM, andy pugh wrote:
The original corresponent has tried the latest Master and says.
(Three plane test spiral code)
"is good executed,
but if start linuxcnc and go reference,
after reference is finisch and in mdi start g2 x0y0z-1 j4
The original corresponent has tried the latest Master and says.
(Three plane test spiral code)
"is good executed,
but if start linuxcnc and go reference,
after reference is finisch and in mdi start g2 x0y0z-1 j4 f1000
the tool go directly again at z-1 , not executed circle."
Is anyone else able
On Fri, 9 Dec 2022 at 23:50, Stuart Stevenson wrote:
> I think I would pay attention to G90/G91.
Shouldn't really matter. It's a different way to define the start and end
points, but that happens in untouched code.
--
atp
"A motorcycle is a bicycle with a pandemonium attachment and is
2022 at 6:43 PM Peter C. Wallace wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 7 Dec 2022, andy pugh wrote:
> >
> > > Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2022 21:54:41 +
> > > From: andy pugh
> > > Reply-To: EMC developers
> > > To: EMC developers
> > > Subject: Re: [Emc-devel
000
> > From: andy pugh
> > Reply-To: EMC developers
> > To: EMC developers
> > Subject: Re: [Emc-developers] Arc Bug, help needed.
> >
> >> On Wed, 7 Dec 2022 at 20:36, John Thornton wrote:
> >>
> >> I can confirm the bug is in the 2
On Wed, 7 Dec 2022, andy pugh wrote:
Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2022 21:54:41 +
From: andy pugh
Reply-To: EMC developers
To: EMC developers
Subject: Re: [Emc-developers] Arc Bug, help needed.
On Wed, 7 Dec 2022 at 20:36, John Thornton wrote:
I can confirm the bug is in the 2.9 branch
Turned out I needed to install libpython3.11-dev on debian 12
JT
On 12/7/2022 3:52 PM, John Thornton wrote:
dpkg-checkbuilddeps returns nothing so they are satisfied
I attached the config.log
On 12/7/2022 2:37 PM, Sebastian Kuzminsky wrote:
On 12/7/22 13:31, John Thornton wrote:
I can
Looks like the Axis sim defaults to G20, I think the Axis sim does not
have NO_FORCE_HOMING in the ini.
AMD Ryzen 5 5600X 6-Core Processor.
Noel on the IRC confirmed the bug in axis but not in qtdragon... then it
got too cold for him in the shop.
JT
On 12/7/2022 3:54 PM, andy pugh wrote:
On Wed, 7 Dec 2022 at 20:36, John Thornton wrote:
> I can confirm the bug is in the 2.9 branch that is currently in Debian,
> I'm unable to build a RIP on 2.9 to see if it's still there as I get
metric or imperial config?
Did you run the test command in G20 or G21?
NO_FORCE_HOMING?
What CPU
dpkg-checkbuilddeps returns nothing so they are satisfied
I attached the config.log
On 12/7/2022 2:37 PM, Sebastian Kuzminsky wrote:
On 12/7/22 13:31, John Thornton wrote:
I can confirm the bug is in the 2.9 branch that is currently in
Debian, I'm unable to build a RIP on 2.9 to see if it's
Thanks Seb, missing a bunch of build dependencies... trying to
multi-task and make parts at the same time so I get distracted and
forget the stuff I should know by heart now.
JT
On 12/7/2022 2:37 PM, Sebastian Kuzminsky wrote:
On 12/7/22 13:31, John Thornton wrote:
I can confirm the bug is
Thanks Seb, missing a bunch of build dependencies... trying to
multi-task and make parts at the same time so I get distracted and
forget the stuff I should know by heart now.
JT
On 12/7/2022 2:37 PM, Sebastian Kuzminsky wrote:
On 12/7/22 13:31, John Thornton wrote:
I can confirm the bug is
On 12/7/22 13:31, John Thornton wrote:
I can confirm the bug is in the 2.9 branch that is currently in Debian,
I'm unable to build a RIP on 2.9 to see if it's still there as I get
configure errors I don't understand how to fix.
configure error could not link test program to Python... Maybe
I can confirm the bug is in the 2.9 branch that is currently in Debian,
I'm unable to build a RIP on 2.9 to see if it's still there as I get
configure errors I don't understand how to fix.
configure error could not link test program to Python... Maybe the main
Python library has been
On 12/7/22 11:19, andy pugh wrote:
On Wed, 7 Dec 2022 at 15:49, gene heskett wrote:
Which doesn't look like its related to your g2 problem. I do not see a
g2 test by that name.
There isn't a G2 test in the tests.
The test is
"if open axis.
Comand g2 x0 y0 j5 z-2 f1000.
The machine not
Yes, it shows up in the preview when ran from the MDI, but if I try and
repeat the move after a G0 Z0 I get the proper arc circle down to Z-2.
If I start the Axis sim then release the estop and press power then
enter G2 X0 Y0 Z-2 F1000 in the MDI only the Z move happens. Then if I
do Z0 and
On Wed, 7 Dec 2022, andy pugh wrote:
Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2022 11:50:09 +
From: andy pugh
Reply-To: EMC developers
To: EMC developers
Subject: [Emc-developers] Arc Bug, help needed.
In February I fixed this bug:
https://github.com/LinuxCNC/linuxcnc/issues/1528
But, it seems, I failed
On Wed, 7 Dec 2022 at 15:49, gene heskett wrote:
Which doesn't look like its related to your g2 problem. I do not see a
> g2 test by that name.
There isn't a G2 test in the tests.
The test is
"if open axis.
Comand g2 x0 y0 j5 z-2 f1000.
The machine not execution g2 , but only Z-2."
--
On 12/7/22 09:39, andy pugh wrote:
On Wed, 7 Dec 2022 at 14:31, John Thornton wrote:
I can reproduce the problem in 2.9 with an Axis sim, the move shown on
the backport is Z only. I need to connect to a machine to test if the
backport is what happens.
Do you mean "backplot" or "preview"?
On Wed, 7 Dec 2022 at 14:31, John Thornton wrote:
> I can reproduce the problem in 2.9 with an Axis sim, the move shown on
> the backport is Z only. I need to connect to a machine to test if the
> backport is what happens.
Do you mean "backplot" or "preview"? If it shows up in the preview then
I can reproduce the problem in 2.9 with an Axis sim, the move shown on
the backport is Z only. I need to connect to a machine to test if the
backport is what happens.
I'll have to update my local copy to verify that I have the latest...
but first work.
JT
On 12/7/2022 5:50 AM, andy pugh
On 12/7/22 06:51, andy pugh wrote:
In February I fixed this bug:
https://github.com/LinuxCNC/linuxcnc/issues/1528
But, it seems, I failed to properly consider full-circle spiral arcs, and
the test was wrong.
https://github.com/LinuxCNC/linuxcnc/issues/2169
(Note that this issue report was
On 12/7/22 06:51, andy pugh wrote:
In February I fixed this bug:
https://github.com/LinuxCNC/linuxcnc/issues/1528
But, it seems, I failed to properly consider full-circle spiral arcs, and
the test was wrong.
https://github.com/LinuxCNC/linuxcnc/issues/2169
(Note that this issue report was
In February I fixed this bug:
https://github.com/LinuxCNC/linuxcnc/issues/1528
But, it seems, I failed to properly consider full-circle spiral arcs, and
the test was wrong.
https://github.com/LinuxCNC/linuxcnc/issues/2169
(Note that this issue report was _not_ raised by the original reporter,
31 matches
Mail list logo
