real thanks ... in the end from my point of view, it all depends on the support I can get from vxworks staff. I am alone and I do many things too, It seems that vxworks has good support, so you can ask them the right tricks to do things. I can make an attempt, if it will work I'll punch a shot, if you like, you'll tell me something about it. I do not think I'll get some results before January 2018 ....
if not work ... I'll report you my work and the bad result .... so other people will have the information about it. bkt 2017-06-17 4:51 GMT+02:00 Jeff Epler <[email protected]>: > On Fri, Jun 16, 2017 at 09:35:55PM +0200, theman whosoldtheworld wrote: > > is possible run lcnc over vxworks? and how? > > LinuxCNC depends on rtapi (bundled as part of the LinuxCNC source tree) for > portability to different RTOSes. > > To use LinuxCNC on a new rtos such as vxworks, "all" you have to do is > create > an implementation of rtapi. > > I am not familiar with vxworks, so I can't speculate whether this is > difficult > or very difficult. If vxworks has an API that is broadly similar to POSIX > threads, then it is going to be less hard; you might just have to > implement the > very small interface of the 'RtapiApp' virtual base class [plus additional > detection logic, scripting in scripts/realtime, and, oh, lots of other > stuff I > don't remember off the top of my head]. If it's not broadly similar to > POSIX, > then you can either see what has to be made a virtual method of RtapiApp, > or > make a fresh implementation from scratch (the classic kernel-mode realtime > with > rtai is like this, though it predates uspace and rtapi_app by many years). > > Then you will have to do whatever porting is necessary to run non-realtime > POSIX apps such as milltask, and if you aren't running a local graphical > user > interface you'll have to deal with nml-over-tcp and all the rough edges > that > exist there. (and of course if you can't run regular non-realtime POSIX > apps > such as milltask then you have a much bigger problem) > > Basically, you need to throw a lot of developer time at it and maybe > you'll get > a useful result and maybe you won't. > > Ultimately, accepting a vxworks rtapi implementation would be a tough call > for > LinuxCNC developers; I'd be reluctant unless we had a plan for keeping it > actively automatically tested and had a developer who would show up to fix > at > least showstopper bugs. > > Jeff > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > ------------------ > Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most > engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot > _______________________________________________ > Emc-developers mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot _______________________________________________ Emc-developers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers
