Thanks your reply. I will have a try, though I am not involved in this with my work now. Really hope this project will make a great difference. ________________________________ From: schoone...@gmail.com <schoone...@gmail.com> Sent: Sunday, September 9, 2018 3:47:44 PM To: Steve Better; EMC developers Subject: Re: [Emc-developers] Breakout of HAL/ machinekits's HAL
Hi Steve The main problem is probably your OS We only support Debian and the package dependencies are based upon what is in the Debian repos. Ubuntu tends to just do whatever it likes and wants to 'Ubuntuise' everything. There is a reason why the linuxcnc distro image is also Debian based. The czmq / zmq libraries are a particular problem because they were changed to a new version that is backwardly incompatible with the old one by the zmq project. At great trouble we ported our code to the new API, to enable Machinekit to run on later versions of debian where it is the default. The new libs are now backported by Debian as far back as Jessie thankfully. The version requirements are to get the correct ones from Debian repos. If you install Debian Jessie / Stretch (even Buster if you use my repo), it will just work. The docs clearly state "You should first have a working Debian installation" http://www.machinekit.io/docs/getting-started/getting-started-platform/ Hope that clarifies On 09/09/18 16:06, Steve Better wrote: > Hi Schooner, > > Glad you are here! > > I tried to install Machinekit-HAL today. My OS is Ubuntu 16.04. After > I installed libczmq-dev with apt-get, I just cannot continue > successfully with the following error: > > "Requested 'libczmq > 4.0' but version of libczmq is 3.0.2" > > This is not friendly to attract more people to participate in this project. > > I think the Machinekit project and the LinuxCNC project need to be more > visionary. Not just in the software aspect, but also in the motion > control aspect. We need more advanced technologies these days to control > a manipulator or a mobile robot. OROCOS and ROS is still not very > successful in practice, and maybe they won't get there ever. > Well, young people are attracted by mobile internet and AI, the CNC > technology seems to be old since the EMC emerging in 1990s. We need > modern visions like OROCOS and ROS to push this project further. > > > On 09/09/2018 06:27 PM, schoone...@gmail.com wrote: >> Hi Chris, >> >> As my paws are all over a lot of the work you are mentioning >> (multicore in collaboration with Michael Haberler some years back) >> and the splitting into HAL and CNC stacks, why not contact me direct >> to discuss. >> >> I think there is scope for collaboration which could be to both our >> projects >> benefit, not least from a reduction in maintenance. >> >> The multicore work you mention, primarily adds atomic operations and >> other measures >> to prevent things like the side effects of multi core, multi cache >> operations, where values can be updated >> by one cache before another has finished. >> >> Machinekit's HAL generally has hugely diversified from the original >> linuxcnc, instantiated components for instance >> which can be added or removed at any time, even in a running system. >> Because of backwardly compatible measures however, its use is not >> visibly greatly different. >> >> The splitting out of HAL, not only allows the stack to be used for non >> CNC projects, such as ROS, >> but is arranged so that installing machinekit-cnc on top of >> machinekit-hal, brings you back to a fully functioning machinekit again. >> >> We are contemplating moving to a 2 package installation and >> deprecating the original machinekit repo and packages. >> >> If you were to split out your CNC stack, which has some features we do >> not have, >> with the correct tweaks it could even sit on our HAL stack and result >> in a fully functioning >> CNC controller again. >> >> Unfortunately we have not replaced NML with zmq, that would be the >> 'holy grail'. >> Michael Haberler and Alex's protobuf message headers and zmq >> (machinetalk) would probably be the way to go there >> >> It is something we would be interested in discussing, I am sure. >> >> regards >> >> Mick >> On 09/09/18 01:27, emc-developers-requ...@lists.sourceforge.net wrote: >>> From: Chris Morley<chrisinnana...@hotmail.com> >>> To: EMC DEV<emc-developers@lists.sourceforge.net> >>> Subject: [Emc-developers] Breakout of HAL/ machinekits's HAL >>> Message-ID: >>> >>> <cy1pr05mb22506fd52585a3d57cfc4eefc0...@cy1pr05mb2250.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> >>> >>> >>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" >>> >>> I see that machinekit has broken out HAL and cnc (Well and lots of >>> others) into different repositories. >>> >>> https://github.com/machinekit >>> >>> [https://avatars1.githubusercontent.com/u/6759549?s=280&v=4]<https://github.com/machinekit> >>> >>> >>> machinekit ? GitHub<https://github.com/machinekit> >>> github.com >>> GitHub is where people build software. More than 28 million people >>> use GitHub to discover, fork, and contribute to over 85 million >>> projects. >>> >>> It also seems they have updated HAL considerably, >>> >>> They were working on RT multicore support, anytime instantiation of >>> HAL components >>> >>> cython support.. probably other stuff - I'm not sure if it includes >>> ARM or FPGA upgrades. >>> >>> >>> I was thinking that maybe linuxcnc should discuss if that is >>> something that would be of interested. >>> >>> >>> pros I see: >>> >>> -chance to break HAL out of cnc stack >>> >>> -seemingly an upgrade in capability >>> >>> -someone else has done a lot of work/testing already >>> >>> -might allow more cross work of developers between the projects >>> >>> >>> cons: >>> >>> -surely a lot of work to incorporate (though it does support legacy >>> code, if I understand right) >>> >>> -lack of experience with concepts/code - will take time to become >>> comfortable >>> >>> -we'd have to admit they are not bad people:) >>> >>> >>> Ok that last one was meant as fun. >>> >>> >>> There are very smart and hard working people on both projects, it >>> would be nice to benefit both >>> >>> projects. >>> >>> >>> I have not really looked at the code, nor am qualified to give >>> indepth opinion of the code. >>> >>> I have watched the video of the multicore idea. >>> >>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=brT0bEkJLSY >>> >>> There are more videos (including one about the trajectory planner >>> that we now use) >>> >>> >>> Thoughts? >>> >>> >>> Chris M >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Emc-developers mailing list >> Emc-developers@lists.sourceforge.net >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers _______________________________________________ Emc-developers mailing list Emc-developers@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers
