On 11/02/2014 09:18 AM, John Alexander Stewart wrote:
> Can someone tell me what the eventual plans for Machinekit and LinuxCNC is?
>
> Are the two forks going to come together again?
>
> I really like LinuxCNC, and I really like the idea of small, embedded CNC
> controllers, so I'm just wondering. (I have been loosely following the
> machine kit google group; maybe the answer is obvious, but I've missed it)
>
>
There are not complete forks, never to share code again.  A 
large part of the reason
for the fork, as I understand it, was to break free from the 
constraints of NML and
its dependence on shared memory, with the only alternative 
of massive overhead
when sending the entire memory block across the net every 
servo period.

The machinekit folks have their own system for doing this, 
enabling them to break
parts of LinuxCNC to run on different hosts over the net.  I 
think there is some
disagreement on how this was done, and so the LinuxCNC group 
is doing this
a different way, that they think will be more flexible.  I 
REALLY do not know all
the details of this.  But, the machinekit folks have their 
scheme working, apparently,
and the LinuxCNC way is not ready yet, I think.

Also, the machinekit runs with a Xenomai kernel on the 
Beagle Bone, and with the
assist from Charles Steinkuehler's PRU code for step 
generation, etc. it works
quite well.  You can't get much smaller than that!  I have 
not run a machine with
the beagle/machinekit, but build CRAMPS boards (Also 
Charles' design) and it
all seems to work.  I just ssh -X into the Beagle, so I have 
not explored the
concept of running the GUI on a different CPU.  If I was 
running a real machine,
the GUI latency might be bothersome.

Jon

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Emc-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Reply via email to