As a little anecdotal evidence on remote UI - I've worked a little bit
on remote operation of CNC's - sticking web cams in the environment.
etc. I was able to run a tormach pretty successfully by VNC'ing in to
it. I can see a future in which this is very useful to commercial
users. I can see a
On Mon, 04 May 2020 17:32:37 +0200 Jon Elson
wrote
> On 05/04/2020 09:01 AM, Sebastian Kuzminsky wrote:
> >
> > Last time I checked, which was very, very long ago, Machinekit had not
> > replaced the NML system used to communicate between the LinuxCNC GUIs and
> > the machine
On Mon, 04 May 2020 17:32:37 +0200 Jon Elson
wrote
> On 05/04/2020 09:01 AM, Sebastian Kuzminsky wrote:
> >
> > Last time I checked, which was very, very long ago, Machinekit had not
> > replaced the NML system used to communicate between the LinuxCNC GUIs and
> > the machine
On 05/04/2020 09:01 AM, Sebastian Kuzminsky wrote:
Last time I checked, which was very, very long ago, Machinekit had not
replaced the NML system used to communicate between the LinuxCNC GUIs and
the machine controller, they had just wrapped it in a new software layer.
Did they get rid of NML
On Montag, 4. Mai 2020, 13:43:53 CEST andy pugh wrote:
> I do think that MK perhaps got too caught-up in fixing the archaic and
> weird LinuxCNC software architecture rather than considering the
> question:
> "How does this make the software make better parts"
Yes, Andy - that's exactly what I
On Mon, May 4, 2020, 07:33 andy pugh wrote:
> On Sun, 3 May 2020 at 13:40, Robert Murphy wrote:
>
> > Machinekit, IMHO, seemed to be focused more towards the hobbyist who
> > wants bells and whistles rather than an industrial\commercial scene.
>
> I do think that MK perhaps got too caught-up in
On Sun, 3 May 2020 at 13:40, Robert Murphy wrote:
> Machinekit, IMHO, seemed to be focused more towards the hobbyist who
> wants bells and whistles rather than an industrial\commercial scene.
I do think that MK perhaps got too caught-up in fixing the archaic and
weird LinuxCNC software
On Montag, 4. Mai 2020, 04:13:00 CEST Robert Murphy wrote:
> I did come to realise that yes remote GUI would have a place in an
> industrial setting.
May be I'm too simple minded. Could you please explain the conditions, where
it makes sense to you?
> I would imagine if the protocol was simple
I realised my opinion would come to bite me in the foot as I was
diagnosing the linuxcncrsh-tcp test.
I did come to realise that yes remote GUI would have a place in an
industrial setting.
I would imagine if the protocol was simple enough and with tcp a mid to
hi end microcontroller with a
Hi,
my answer was rejected yesterday, so I try to resend it ...
On Sonntag, 3. Mai 2020, 16:17:46 CEST Johannes Fassotte wrote:
> The name remote UI should be considered to mean that it is interfaced to
> LinuxCNC using a network connection. This connection for most individuals
> would likely be
The slow update rate is likely a method issue and not an issue with network
speed itself. Most networks can handle speeds of GB per second rates which is
much much faster than actually required. Networks are used to stream all sorts
of data these days. Lagging behind can indicate a buffer
On Sunday 03 May 2020 10:17:46 Johannes Fassotte wrote:
> The name remote UI should be considered to mean that it is interfaced
> to LinuxCNC using a network connection. This connection for most
> individuals would likely be via local host but it can be used remotely
> if desired from other
On 05/03/2020 07:26 AM, Robert Murphy wrote:
Machinekit, IMHO, seemed to be focused more towards the
hobbyist who
wants bells and whistles rather than an
industrial\commercial scene.
Well, no. A major focus was to support multiple instances
of Machinekit working in the same
physical space,
> Hi,
>
> On Sonntag, 3. Mai 2020, 10:43:12 CEST N wrote:
> > Reading manual. "motion -- accepts NML motion commands" so I guees you want
> > some of these commands to come from your hardware buttons?
>
> Well, my idea is to have hardware buttons for every command, so that the UI
> is
> just
The name remote UI should be considered to mean that it is interfaced to
LinuxCNC using a network connection. This connection for most individuals would
likely be via local host but it can be used remotely if desired from other
suitable devices. Such a interface adds flexibility and would
I agree, I never saw the sense in a remote UI, other than all the
"hipster\makers" want to control the world with their phones.
Machinekit, IMHO, seemed to be focused more towards the hobbyist who
wants bells and whistles rather than an industrial\commercial scene.
Don't take this as having a go,
Hi,
On Sonntag, 3. Mai 2020, 10:43:12 CEST N wrote:
> Reading manual. "motion -- accepts NML motion commands" so I guees you want
> some of these commands to come from your hardware buttons?
Well, my idea is to have hardware buttons for every command, so that the UI is
just an infoboard.
Don't
Hi Daniel,
> It seems some developer at machinekit did some good work there.
> ...
> ... are the best features in machinekit that are missing in linuxcnc.
Hm, I don't think, that a remote ui is something important, that linuxcnc is
missing. And I don't take the nml-layer for bad so that it
> On Sonntag, 3. Mai 2020, 09:13:22 CEST N wrote:
> > That said it might still make sense to have some kind of
> > communication in between GUI and hal ...
>
> Yes!
>
> I'd like to implement my buttons in hardware, together with some potis and
> currently I don't know, how to get rid of it from
Hi from Brazil!
It seems some developer at machinekit did some good work there. I tested
this:.
https://machinekoder.com/extending-machineface-with-hal-remote-to-control-smart-plugs/
years ago, and that worked pretty well.
IMHO haltalk and machinetalk:
On Sonntag, 3. Mai 2020, 09:13:22 CEST N wrote:
> That said it might still make sense to have some kind of
> communication in between GUI and hal ...
Yes!
I'd like to implement my buttons in hardware, together with some potis and
currently I don't know, how to get rid of it from my gui.
I know,
> Please don't ditch Axis. It's nice, clean & simple and I found it quite
> intuitive to use. It works well for my hobby class 3 axis mill.
Guess it do exactly what it should but have no other experience with other GUI
for CNC machine.
> I like the fact that there is a GUI included with
Please don't ditch Axis. It's nice, clean & simple and I found it quite
intuitive to use. It works well for my hobby class 3 axis mill.
I like the fact that there is a GUI included with Linuxcnc, one less
thing to install.
If I was a new user I'd be a little confused if I had to install a GUI
On 5/2/20 8:06 AM, andy pugh wrote:
On Sat, 2 May 2020 at 14:33, Juergen Gnoss wrote:
I'm with the folks that like to have lcnc and gui's separated.
It's a much cleaner way for maintenance.
I think it's a daft idea from a user support point of view.
Take the example of where issues would
+1 for focussing on quality over quantity.
1 UI is minimum due to having a reference implementation for the interfaces
as well as being able to test the overall complete SW system once before it
goes into release. Axis could be this reference UI. Then put the one fancy
most promising UI with big
On 05/02/2020 05:13 AM, andy pugh wrote:
On Sat, 2 May 2020 at 10:15, Phill Carter wrote:
I really don't see a problem with having the UI's as part of LinuxCNC
Many folk already complain that LinuxCNC is too difficult to set up. I
think that we would lose a lot of new users at the point that
On Sat, 2 May 2020 at 14:33, Juergen Gnoss wrote:
> I'm with the folks that like to have lcnc and gui's separated.
> It's a much cleaner way for maintenance.
I think it's a daft idea from a user support point of view.
Take the example of where issues would be reported. Would you expect
users
On 5/2/20 8:32 AM, Juergen Gnoss wrote:
I'm with the folks that like to have lcnc and gui's separated.
It's a much cleaner way for maintenance.
Since new users and installation is a valid point, we should check
if it is possible to make a tasksel like LinuxCNC install routine.
Ju
YES!! Make
On Sat, 2 May 2020 17:42:17 +1000
Rod Webster wrote:
> Whilst I am a competent programmer with C and struggle to code in Python, I
> think enforcing C++ on GUI users would be a disaster. An interpreted
> language is much easier to work with and to add the overhead of
> compilation to a quick
> > Another problem is, that neither pyqt, nor gscreen runs on my desktop box.
> > I
> > don't know enuf of python to solve that problems on my own and it does not
> > help, if others state, that they don't have problems.
> > So I started with java, where I know to solve my own problems.
> >
I say it make sense and there are already NML communication which may also be
used over TCP/IP network. I think however someone said it is currently not
working condition for everything, might have been the hal scope. Tried and it
might be the real time end worked but axis did not, think
I'm with the folks that like to have lcnc and gui's separated.
It's a much cleaner way for maintenance.
Since new users and installation is a valid point, we should check
if it is possible to make a tasksel like LinuxCNC install routine.
Ju
___
re the original post:
From: andy pugh
Sent: May 1, 2020 12:17 PM
To: EMC developers
Subject: [Emc-developers] Third-Party GUIs.
I wonder if the docs should mention the GUIs that are made for
LinuxCNC but are not part of LinuxCNC?
I am thinking of
http
> On 2 May 2020, at 8:13 pm, andy pugh wrote:
>
> On Sat, 2 May 2020 at 10:15, Phill Carter wrote:
>
>> I really don't see a problem with having the UI's as part of LinuxCNC
>
> Many folk already complain that LinuxCNC is too difficult to set up. I
> think that we would lose a lot of new
On Saturday 02 May 2020 04:46:52 Phill Carter wrote:
> > On 2 May 2020, at 5:32 pm, Reinhard
> > wrote:
> >
> > On Samstag, 2. Mai 2020, 08:22:05 CEST Jared McLaughlin wrote:
> >> In my opinion, linuxcnc should be more like a distro that
> >> you install packages on. The UI's should be packages
Yes, I know what axis is written in. And yes there is plenty to choose from
but the suggestion was to use C++ which made no sense
Rod Webster
*1300 896 832*
+61 435 765 611
VMN®
www.vmn.com.au
On Sat, 2 May 2020 at 20:20, andy pugh wrote:
> On Sat, 2 May 2020 at 10:41, Rod Webster wrote:
>
>
On Sat, 2 May 2020 at 10:15, Phill Carter wrote:
> I really don't see a problem with having the UI's as part of LinuxCNC
Many folk already complain that LinuxCNC is too difficult to set up. I
think that we would lose a lot of new users at the point that they
finished installing LinuxCNC and
On Sat, 2 May 2020 at 10:41, Rod Webster wrote:
> Only using C++ would basically stop the customisation of this wonderful
> software in its tracks and force users to continue to use an archaic GUI
> called Axis.
Axis is written in Python. (and Tcl)
> Once Python 3.0 is upgraded the next major
Whilst I am a competent programmer with C and struggle to code in Python, I
think enforcing C++ on GUI users would be a disaster. An interpreted
language is much easier to work with and to add the overhead of
compilation to a quick GUI tweak will leave users out in the cold. I
persevere with
> On 2 May 2020, at 5:32 pm, Reinhard wrote:
>
> On Samstag, 2. Mai 2020, 08:22:05 CEST Jared McLaughlin wrote:
>> In my opinion, linuxcnc should be more like a distro that
>> you install packages on. The UI's should be packages that are not
>> maintained by the main development team.
>
>
c rather then
> > other projects.
> >
> >
> > From: andy pugh
> > Sent: May 1, 2020 12:17 PM
> > To: EMC developers
> > Subject: [Emc-developers] Third-Party GUIs.
> >
> > I wonder if the docs should mention th
Reinhard, I'm on your side, I rest my case. Thanks for summarising all the
failings of the current default GUI.
Rod Webster
*1300 896 832*
+61 435 765 611
VMN®
www.vmn.com.au
On Sat, 2 May 2020 at 17:33, Reinhard
wrote:
> On Samstag, 2. Mai 2020, 08:22:05 CEST Jared McLaughlin wrote:
> > In
On Samstag, 2. Mai 2020, 08:22:05 CEST Jared McLaughlin wrote:
> In my opinion, linuxcnc should be more like a distro that
> you install packages on. The UI's should be packages that are not
> maintained by the main development team.
That makes sense
> I also agree with the idea that a cleaned
Use this gtk interface and it works but must install older version of glade.
Still consider C++ a better option than python and I used both but if someone
wrote in python I am of course a grateful user. Main reason for rather soft
real time like GUI is static types so compiler could check
I'm still getting up to speed on some things, but I agree with this
sentiment. In my opinion, linuxcnc should be more like a distro that
you install packages on. The UI's should be packages that are not
maintained by the main development team. I also agree with the idea
that a cleaned up "new
That sounds awesome Phill
Rod Webster
*1300 896 832*
+61 435 765 611
VMN®
www.vmn.com.au
On Sat, 2 May 2020 at 10:24, Phill Carter wrote:
>
>
> > On 2 May 2020, at 9:38 am, andy pugh wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, 2 May 2020 at 00:32, Phill Carter
> wrote:
> >
> >> If we link to one site then we
> On 2 May 2020, at 9:38 am, andy pugh wrote:
>
> On Sat, 2 May 2020 at 00:32, Phill Carter wrote:
>
>> If we link to one site then we may as well link to every known site that has
>> a LinuxCNC compatible GUI
>
> That is what I am proposing, yes.
>
> (It's not like there are hundreds)
On Sat, 2 May 2020 at 00:32, Phill Carter wrote:
> If we link to one site then we may as well link to every known site that has
> a LinuxCNC compatible GUI
That is what I am proposing, yes.
(It's not like there are hundreds)
--
atp
"A motorcycle is a bicycle with a pandemonium attachment
> On 2 May 2020, at 9:28 am, John Thornton wrote:
>
> Actually I would just link to the QtPyVCP web site qtpyvcp.com
>
> JT
>
If we link to one site then we may as well link to every known site that has a
LinuxCNC compatible GUI
Cheers, Phill
> On 5/1/2020 4:28 PM, Gene Heskett wrote:
Actually I would just link to the QtPyVCP web site qtpyvcp.com
JT
On 5/1/2020 4:28 PM, Gene Heskett wrote:
On Friday 01 May 2020 16:38:01 John Thornton wrote:
Sounds like a good idea to me.
JT
I think so too John, but verifying that all those extras are alive and
well is more than I'll ask
On Fri, 1 May 2020 at 22:28, Gene Heskett wrote:
> I think so too John, but verifying that all those extras are alive and
> well is more than I'll ask our limited manpower to do, so just the
> mention of something google should find s/b more than enough.
It's a matter of a link and checking it
> Subject: [Emc-developers] Third-Party GUIs.
>
> I wonder if the docs should mention the GUIs that are made for
> LinuxCNC but are not part of LinuxCNC?
>
> I am thinking of
> http://www.qtpyvcp.com/showcase/mill_vcps.html
> And
> https://github.com/DjangoReinhard/J
On Friday 01 May 2020 16:38:01 John Thornton wrote:
> Sounds like a good idea to me.
>
> JT
I think so too John, but verifying that all those extras are alive and
well is more than I'll ask our limited manpower to do, so just the
mention of something google should find s/b more than enough.
>
Sounds like a good idea to me.
JT
On 5/1/2020 7:17 AM, andy pugh wrote:
I wonder if the docs should mention the GUIs that are made for
LinuxCNC but are not part of LinuxCNC?
I am thinking of
http://www.qtpyvcp.com/showcase/mill_vcps.html
And
https://github.com/DjangoReinhard/JCNCScreen
And
: Johannes Fassotte
Sent: May 1, 2020 3:43 PM
To: EMC developers
Subject: Re: [Emc-developers] Third-Party GUIs
Here are my thoughts on user interfaces.
Frankly I think that just a mention that users can make their own user
interface would be enough and how to do that using a universal user interface
I think we should just worry about/concentrate on, linuxcnc rather then other
projects.
From: andy pugh
Sent: May 1, 2020 12:17 PM
To: EMC developers
Subject: [Emc-developers] Third-Party GUIs.
I wonder if the docs should mention the GUIs that are made
> Here are my thoughts on user interfaces.
>
> Frankly I think that just a mention that users can make their own user
> interface would be enough and how to do that using a universal user interface
> method. In my opinion all user interfaces should be removed from LinuxCnc
> proper which will
Here are my thoughts on user interfaces.
Frankly I think that just a mention that users can make their own user
interface would be enough and how to do that using a universal user interface
method. In my opinion all user interfaces should be removed from LinuxCnc
proper which will greatly
I wonder if the docs should mention the GUIs that are made for
LinuxCNC but are not part of LinuxCNC?
I am thinking of
http://www.qtpyvcp.com/showcase/mill_vcps.html
And
https://github.com/DjangoReinhard/JCNCScreen
And maybe also PathPilot.
--
atp
"A motorcycle is a bicycle with a pandemonium
59 matches
Mail list logo
