On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 3:47 PM, Jan <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi,
> It was standard package that provides RPi.GPIO for python.
> I think I checked versions both from dnf and pip.

What was that package's name? I'm not sure off hand which packages are
packaged in Fedora TBH (there's well over 18K source packages).

> I do understand that to debug my configuration I would need to collect
> more data.
>
> My question was more about current user's experiences. Does interaction
> with GPIO is expected to work.
> Which is needed step before jumping into problem solving. If GPIO is
> not expected to work yet, then debugging case is pointless.

I'm not aware of any reason it shouldn't. I don't have direct access
to a working RPi ATM but the lsgpio tool (built in the 4.9
kernel-tools package) gave me a list of GPIOs the last time I tested
it, I've not had time to dig deeper although it's on my todo list.

> I wanted also to use some Adafruit libs latter for DHT22 sensor.
> It failed to compile as its detection of device is based on
> /proc/cpuinfo.

Well that's just a terrible library by the sounds of it.

> Right now I put back Raspbian, as GPIO part there just works.
>
> And I do not understand the device tree concept. It is not something I
> have noticed before on desktop or server. That's why I might miss some
> quite obvious step.

Well on x86 it's not standard, on ARM, Power and other platforms it
is. It's a means of defining the layout of hardware on some platforms
that don't have an x86 style BIOS.

> Regards
>   Jan
> W dniu 03.01.2017, wto o godzinie 07∶11 +0000, użytkownik Peter
> Robinson napisał:
>> On Tue, Dec 6, 2016 at 8:08 AM, Jan <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> > I've problems with using GPIO from python. It just throws some
>> > memory
>> > error and dumps. I'm not familiar with C/dumps and so on, so I did
>> > not
>> > yet start to try to get details of it.
>> >
>> > One thing I noticed is different content of /proc/cpuinfo between
>> > Raspbian and Fedora 25.
>> > Thus my interpretation is that if Fedora reports a bit different
>> > hardware then some calls to some methods might fail.
>> > Am I missing some step that should be done after install?
>> >
>> > It could be some mutation of FAQ: about support for HATs.
>> > But I would love clear statement, which would point that it just
>> > does
>> > not work out-of-the-box and there is/isn't way to manually fix it
>> > for
>> > someone who is not C/kernel developer.
>> > As for me support for HATs and support to set GPIO pin 18 to HIGH
>> > state
>> > are slightly different things. But maybe they have same root cause.
>>
>> I've not had time to test GPIO, what python libraries are you using
>> to
>> access it? Basically some more details would be useful.
_______________________________________________
arm mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to