John Kasunich wrote: > That was mostly > driven by adamant opposition to HAL by certain EMC people. > I wanted to make sure that even if HAL didn't wind up in EMC > (or it was heavily watered down), the highly modular concept > would be preserved elsewhere. Once HAL caught on as part > of EMC2, I no longer needed that backup plan, and the BLOCS > Sourceforge project has been sitting in stasis for years. > > I fully support Michael's "MachineKit" idea. And I like his name > better too. > I have a customer right now who is a candidate for a standalone HAL. Not such a big deal to load an entire LinuxCNC system and just use it that way, so it may not need a separate way to build it. The customer has some razor blades on a chain, and these need to move like electronic gearing when a part comes down a production line. I mentioned to him that this might be a good case to run HAL standalone, rather than having to trigger a G-code program at the right moment.
Jon ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This SF.net email is sponsored by Windows: Build for Windows Store. http://p.sf.net/sfu/windows-dev2dev _______________________________________________ Emc-developers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers
