Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

On 10/10/2017 06:54 AM, Rod Webster wrote: Where any of this gets tricky is that the realtime modules don't have file-system access. Even from say a Gmoccapy Python screen handler? No, the GUIs have file access, just like all the non-realtime parts of LinuxCNC. The delineation between real

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

>Where any of this gets tricky is that the realtime modules don't have >file-system access. Even from say a Gmoccapy Python screen handler? Rod Webster +61 435 765 611 Vehicle Modifications Network www.vehiclemods.net.au On 10 October 2017 at 22:49, andy pugh wrote: > On 10 October 2017 at 13

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

On 10 October 2017 at 13:18, Rod Webster wrote: > My thought was that would let you embed > the database natively within LinuxCNC without worrying about installing SQL Where any of this gets tricky is that the realtime modules don't have file-system access. -- atp "A motorcycle is a bicycle wi

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

Funny, I was thinking about being able to manage a database from LinuxCNC for a plasma cutter and got as far as looking to see if there was a python based SQL database server and of course there are a couple. SQL Alchemy seems to be the one to look at... My thought was that would let you embed the

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

On 28 October 2016 at 18:03, andy pugh wrote: > On 28 October 2016 at 16:05, Niemand Sonst wrote: >> IMHO the first step should be to eliminate the limit in the number of >> tools and describe in detail, what information linuxcnc do need and how >> to submit that information. I am pretty sure, th

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

On 4 November 2016 at 13:58, dragon wrote: > - My understanding is that we are currently reading the entire tool > table into shared memory? I am not sure if it is shared memory as such, I think it is all squeezed into an NML message. But I haven't looked at it in detail for years. -- atp "A mo

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

I could use a bit of "back story" to help me understand the entire problem. I spent a bunch of time browsing the code and looking at the developer docs and notes over the past few days. I have some bigger questions and thoughts, now. If we put aside for a second the issues of defining a DB schema,

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

Thanks for checking... On 11/01/2016 11:50 AM, andy pugh wrote: > On 1 November 2016 at 16:13, dragon wrote: >> Do you remember who you worked with at Tormach? > > Actually, looking back, it was someone at zbot that Tormach put me in > touch with. > signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digita

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

On 1 November 2016 at 16:13, dragon wrote: > Do you remember who you worked with at Tormach? Actually, looking back, it was someone at zbot that Tormach put me in touch with. -- atp "A motorcycle is a bicycle with a pandemonium attachment and is designed for the especial use of mechanical geniu

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

Andy, I just looked at these two links. I REALLY like what you started here. If you are open to my thoughts I will find some time in the next couple of days to flesh out some further ideas and directions for this. I think you made a great start. Do you remember who you worked with at Tormach? I w

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

Personally I think that an interface and possible backing DB to tie gcode, tools, and machines together is a great idea but should definitely be separate from the tool table. It is an edge case and while many users make use of the tool table, including those that do not even have ATCs, there are fa

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

On Oct 28 2016 11:03 AM, andy pugh wrote: > On 28 October 2016 at 16:05, Niemand Sonst wrote: >> IMHO the first step should be to eliminate the limit in the number >> of >> tools and describe in detail, what information linuxcnc do need and >> how >> to submit that information. I am pretty sure,

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

Norbert, I think it is OK. I think it was people being overly sensitive to subtle meanings of things. I did not notice, until you just pointed it out, that the message commented on is 20 months old! No, the time to take offence would have been in February of *last year*. It is enough for m

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

On 28 October 2016 at 16:05, Niemand Sonst wrote: > IMHO the first step should be to eliminate the limit in the number of > tools and describe in detail, what information linuxcnc do need and how > to submit that information. I am pretty sure, that the first tool tables > will be presented after t

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

Hallo, here my 2 cents: First we should distinguish in two parts: - What information does linuxcnc need to work (current level) * tool number * pocket number * tool diameter * tool length - What information do the user want: * I already mentioned some I would like to see

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

Hallo, I do not know, why this comes up again. IMHO in 2015 I ask to appologize my words. I am not trying to insult anybody. If that was the case, i bet your pardon. Norbert Am 27.10.2016 um 11:41 schrieb W. Martinjak: > On 2015-02-22 20:59, John Thornton wrote: >> Calling things stupid and tr

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

on the same box but I would want it on a standalone tool manager >box. > >thanks >Stuart > >-- >> >> Message: 5 >> Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2016 17:44:35 +0100 >> From: Sarah Armstrong >> Subject: Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

Ahhh... got it. From the discussion I though that this would be an internal change. As an aux app I have much fewer objections as a LCNC upgrade would not effect the basic operation. On Oct 27 2016 11:37 AM, Sarah Armstrong wrote: > sorry if i was not explicit , but i would keep gcode as is ,

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

On Oct 27 2016 11:44 AM, andy pugh wrote: > On 27 October 2016 at 18:18, EBo wrote: >> I'm just waiting at this point to see people prototype something >> so we can look at it. > > Then I can only assume that you haven't been paying attention for the > last 3 years. sigh... If someone implemente

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

Oct 2016 17:44:35 +0100 > From: Sarah Armstrong > Subject: Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit > To: EMC developers > Message-ID: > gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 > > i for one would like to see lcnc expanded to be able to use a r

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

On 27 October 2016 at 18:52, James Waples wrote: > It seems all the projects linked to in this thread are quite stale unless > I'm missing something. No, you aren't missing anything. I made a branch, three years ago, with (many of) the changes needed to use a database as the tooltable and nobody

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

Sarah – That makes a lot more sense. I started panicking at the idea of throwing gcode at a binary blob database hole. > Then I can only assume that you haven't been paying attention for the last 3 years. It seems all the projects linked to in this thread are quite stale unless I'm missing someth

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

On 27 October 2016 at 18:18, EBo wrote: > I'm just waiting at this point to see people prototype something > so we can look at it. Then I can only assume that you haven't been paying attention for the last 3 years. -- atp "A motorcycle is a bicycle with a pandemonium attachment and is designed

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

sorry if i was not explicit , but i would keep gcode as is , however holding the gcode filename in the database as an entry to tie it all together having this as an additional to lcnc , but having say a list of colum names that are used by lcnc internaly , and say the database name held in the ini

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

I agree about the complexity part. The one issue that does make sense to keeping it in a data store is that if someone moves the g-code to clean up the dirs, then everything breaks. Other than that I think a full on relational database would be more problems than it is worth. I will not mind

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

OK. I like where your head is going, but are you willing to maintain it in the long term? Also, how much of this functionality would be embedded into the critical code path (that everything uses), and how much of it would be addon applications which are nice to have but LCNC still works if th

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

I would say that this is all doable, but I thought that tieing code to fixtures was out of scope for the tool table (which I thought was the scope of the discussion). That said, having the ability to scan a tool and tracking it by barcode, RFID, imprinted magnetic strip/dots, would be very use

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

What's wrong with a filesystem for gcode? There's already a pretty good implementation distributed with the OS that LinuxCNC runs on ;). Additionally, having an SQLite DB of gcode programs is overly complex and makes getting gcode onto my control over a network share impossible. There will likely b

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

i'd second that too John , having lcnc opened up to incorporate mysql for example , and openly accessable formating for the database , would go a long way , i think to a number of additional variations , or even temporary read / write perhaps a M code for auto run gcode once loaded , and any setup

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

I'd like to see the database of G code get selected by reading a bar code on the part/fixture/etc. Read the bar code load the correct program and when some input says go run the program. JT On 10/27/2016 11:44 AM, Sarah Armstrong wrote: > i for one would like to see lcnc expanded to be able to

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

i for one would like to see lcnc expanded to be able to use a relational database for a number of reasons one for tooling and one for actual gcode, or combination of the two , where say a schema layout txt file would essentially be pointed to from your ini this could then relate a gcode database of

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

This popped up in the user IRC today 3 tool stores and two spindles. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IxBiWPZmcZI Also I have been entering my gear cutters and hobs into a database for a while, I have not yet put all columns needed for for some of the workarounds I am thinking of http://www.archiv

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

Realistically the "we can accomodate *this* much" is more of a design limit. It is good to know for practical purposes, but not so important from day to day. That said if I were working on it I would also make sure that the tool table could be read out-of-core -- meaning that there is some mo

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

Good point... I didn't even think of storing a mesh, wireframe, or SVG of the tool profile in the DB. I started playing with the path feature of the latest FreeCAD last night. This morning I started to wonder what all of the different CAM programs expect for reading in tool tables and if LinunCNC

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

James, No biggy. I have tripped over my own tongue/fingers here as well. Actually knocking up a demo would be nice from a working discussion. I would say for speed and efficiency a couple of IPython notebooks with exemplars would go a long way. Also, my comment on Rust and maintenance was t

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

On Thursday 27 October 2016 09:01:00 James Waples wrote: > EBo, > > You're right, in hindsight that wasn't a very well thought out > statement. What I meant was to discuss what a minimal reimplementation > would look like and doing that relatively quickly, as opposed to > nailing down the entire d

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

On Oct 26 2016 9:40 AM, andy pugh wrote: > On 26 October 2016 at 16:07, EBo wrote: >>> This is NOT 1980. Memory (at this level) is free. > > Indeed. It is hard to imagine needing more than 5kB per tool. The 1980 quote was not mine (the clip makes it appeare to attribute that to me, but no offenc

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

EBo, You're right, in hindsight that wasn't a very well thought out statement. What I meant was to discuss what a minimal reimplementation would look like and doing that relatively quickly, as opposed to nailing down the entire desired feature set with a much longer discussion period. This is a c

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

James, You state: "Everyone could talk about things forever without anything being implemented. As long as the right decisions are made..." What is happening now is hashing out what people care to see. Other than that, we are discussing what we foresee as potential issues with the approach

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

On 2015-02-22 20:59, John Thornton wrote: > Calling things stupid and trying to intimidate the developers with > kindergarten insults usually is not very productive in an open source I'm not a nativ English speaker, and as I know neither is Norbert, hence maybe I am missing the obscure intimidat

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

None of the users' files should get touched during an update... tool tables, .hal and .ini files, etc. If we are worried about breaking the sqlite tool table file there are far larger issues and you better not be touching user files, at least not without asking if they want to keep the old, new, o

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

Although the interface is well defined, the database itself is still an opaque binary blob. What happens if a library upgrade breaks a user's file in the wild? It's easier to hand-/auto-repair a plaintext file, whatever format that's in. Moving to binaries is a regression in my opinion. On Wed, 26

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

SQLite is just another library. Yes, it is another dependency. But it should be no more an issue than libc or libm or any other library. Unlike mysql or postgresql, it does not require a separately running executable. Ken Kenneth Lerman 55 Main Street Newtown, CT 06470 On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 1

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

Am 26.10.2016 um 19:44 schrieb Sebastian Kuzminsky: > On 10/26/2016 11:09 AM, Niemand Sonst wrote: >> Hallo, >> >> I followed till now with big interest. Most opinions and wishes are >> clearly understandable, but shouldn't we begin with other questions? >> >> - How hard will it be to get the tool

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

On 10/26/2016 11:09 AM, Niemand Sonst wrote: > Hallo, > > I followed till now with big interest. Most opinions and wishes are > clearly understandable, but shouldn't we begin with other questions? > > - How hard will it be to get the tool storage out of real-time? IMHO it > does not belong there.

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

I thought Andy had a good start at this at the Wichita fest a few years ago... it is in the linuxcnc git andypugh/tooltable http://git.linuxcnc.org/gitweb?p=linuxcnc.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/andypugh/tooltable sam On 10/26/2016 12:26 PM, James Waples wrote: > The tool count should be limit

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

The tool count should be limited by how much RAM your machine has ;). We should start with a well designed, minimal reimplementation of the tool table in it's current incarnation (minus warts) and add features as they are needed/wanted. Everyone could talk about things forever without anything bei

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

Hallo, I followed till now with big interest. Most opinions and wishes are clearly understandable, but shouldn't we begin with other questions? - How hard will it be to get the tool storage out of real-time? IMHO it does not belong there. - What information are needed for linuxCNC itself (iocon

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

Am 24.10.2016 um 20:55 schrieb andy pugh: > On 22 February 2015 at 17:12, Sebastian Kuzminsky wrote: > >>> http://wiki.linuxcnc.org/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?ToolDatabase >> Can you post your branch again? >> >> Maybe Norbert will review it and see if it satisfies his need? >> >> I'll try to review it too.

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

Gentlemen, Operator loads a program. Operator(or program loading) reads the tool database to populate the local tool table. T01 - selects tool - this initiates a read of the tool table in the control. The tool table in the control could very well be limited to 256 tools or certainly to 32,000 too

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

On 26 October 2016 at 16:07, EBo wrote: >> This is NOT 1980. Memory (at this level) is free. Indeed. It is hard to imagine needing more than 5kB per tool. -- atp "A motorcycle is a bicycle with a pandemonium attachment and is designed for the especial use of mechanical geniuses, daredevils and

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

Then you are requiring SQLite in the dependency chain. Is that more maintainable than not? On Oct 26 2016 8:51 AM, Kenneth Lerman wrote: > I would go with SQLite. And a text (and/or JSON and/or YAML and/or > ...) > interface. > > But the change must provide all of the necessary tools: > 1 -- a

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

On 10/26/16 20:12, Charles Steinkuehler wrote: > On 10/26/2016 7:53 AM, andy pugh wrote: >> Also, you can add your own metadata into a database and a query will >> still work with whatever default query LinuxCNC is supplied with. If >> you add members to a flat-file (or set of several flat files

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

I would go with SQLite. And a text (and/or JSON and/or YAML and/or ...) interface. But the change must provide all of the necessary tools: 1 -- a tool table editor 2 -- a flat file, text interface 3 -- JSON or YAML interface 4 -- a way to read the tool table at startup 5 -- a way to access (the ne

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

-developers] Tool Number limit I am glad you and Andy will develop and maintain this. As I said before, I will not have time to help with this and will accept anything which is provided. On Oct 26 2016 7:08 AM, dragon wrote: > For what it is worth, I am with Andy on this. An actual DB, even > som

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

I am glad you and Andy will develop and maintain this. As I said before, I will not have time to help with this and will accept anything which is provided. On Oct 26 2016 7:08 AM, dragon wrote: > For what it is worth, I am with Andy on this. An actual DB, even > something simple like SQLite, op

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

On Oct 26 2016 6:53 AM, andy pugh wrote: > On 26 October 2016 at 13:26, TJoseph Powderly > wrote: >> >> so >> why not just associate an tool with an index into a technology? > > This has to be part of any solution,because all that G-code knows how > to do is to pass out a single integer, the T-nu

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

On 10/26/2016 7:53 AM, andy pugh wrote: > > Also, you can add your own metadata into a database and a query will > still work with whatever default query LinuxCNC is supplied with. If > you add members to a flat-file (or set of several flat files) then I > think you will break the parser. You can

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

For what it is worth, I am with Andy on this. An actual DB, even something simple like SQLite, opens up many additional possibilities while helping to prevent breaking a custom parser. As he mentioned... this would allow other custom applications written in almost any language to interact with the

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

On 26 October 2016 at 13:26, TJoseph Powderly wrote: > > so > why not just associate an tool with an index into a technology? This has to be part of any solution,because all that G-code knows how to do is to pass out a single integer, the T-number. From that point it is down to "something else" t

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

I think a file format that's a bit more structured than plaintext might be a good idea, especially if there is potentially a lot more information that can be associated with a tool, as well as being able to define tool types etc. Is there a need or desire for a pluggable storage backend? Something

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

(best read with fixed width font ;-) Tool Number Limit or Limitations of Tool Tables? The limitation might be the structure ( as in C ) , not the number of entries. thinking that tool diameter, length, rpm, feed, stepover, plunge increment might suffice ignores the power level, pulse width for

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

OK. So we went from "change nothing" to doing something which is not only necessary for a few, but also darn right practical. No, this all sounds good. I was not aware of the 59 item limit. 256 (8-bit int) or 64K (16-bit int) seems more reasonable. For James example I would lean towards a 1

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

James, Following your conversations with interest, I would like to have a situation where any database could be used, for instance merging in say a Microsoft access database, via a server, that way I could link in to my cam tool database. From camworks. So for me some scriptable interface wo

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

Machines with more than 56 tools are becoming a lot more common so removing this arbitrary limit would be quite important to a lot of people. From a personal standpoint, I would like to be able to group my tools by number (0-99 for endmills, 100-199 for drills, etc). I tried this once before but wa

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

On Oct 25 2016 9:03 AM, andy pugh wrote: > On 25 October 2016 at 15:25, EBo wrote: >> That said, what is the most maintainable long term >> solution? > > Change nothing Then why did the subject come up in the first place? Isn't there bugs that is causing issues and problems are arising?

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

I just realised my work email account automatically adds a scary footer to the email, apologies! I've registered my personal email address jamwaff...@gmail.com with this mailing list and will be using that from now on. Sorry for the noise. On 25 Oct 2016, at 18:32

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

> No, partly because I know nothing about them. I'm a web developer and JSON is used extensively in my field so I think my bias towards those formats is showing through. I understand this is a different use case so am open to other solutions. Serialised C structs anyone? ;) > Defining how to st

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

On 25 October 2016 at 09:24, James Waples wrote: > > Was JSON (or YAML or other plaintext) considered as a possible solution? No, partly because I know nothing about them. However the tool table _feels_like it should be a relational database. Defining how to store the data is only a very small pa

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

Heh, If it works don't fix it - is NOT an option :) We humans like to fiddle with things until they are broken then we can fix it the way is should be done. :) When a pallet pool is added or another machine is added to the pool the OEMs add a separate controller to manage pallets and tools. The ma

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

On 25 October 2016 at 15:25, EBo wrote: > That said, what is the most maintainable long term > solution? Change nothing -- atp "A motorcycle is a bicycle with a pandemonium attachment and is designed for the especial use of mechanical geniuses, daredevils and lunatics." — George Fitch, Atla

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

On Oct 25 2016 6:05 AM, andy pugh wrote: > On 25 October 2016 at 12:53, EBo wrote: >> That said lets discuss what a tool table >> needs to do, > > Have you looked at the wiki page I linked to that lays out the > proposed structure? > There is rather more to it than just adding more tools. The idea

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

All, EBo – I'm using the Apple Mail client like a true peasant, so I'm going with however it decides to format emails. If that becomes an issue then I'll find a better solution. As for creating a JSON schema, sure, I'll see what I can come up with. I'd like to keep discussion around it transpa

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

On 25 October 2016 at 12:53, EBo wrote: > That said lets discuss what a tool table > needs to do, Have you looked at the wiki page I linked to that lays out the proposed structure? There is rather more to it than just adding more tools. The idea is to have a way to describe the relationships betw

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

James at al., Thank you for posting. I can never remember if this group prefers top, bottom, or inline posting -- I have various groups that vehemently insist that their way is better/best, but each group has its preferences... Anyway, I see nothing wrong with the post. I have kept quiet on

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

Hi all First post to this list so apologies if I'm doing something wrong. While I agree that the current tool table implementation is quite limited, I have some reservations about using SQLite as a replacement. As maintainer and developer of (the admittedly little-used but still useful) FusionT

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

On 22 February 2015 at 17:12, Sebastian Kuzminsky wrote: >> http://wiki.linuxcnc.org/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?ToolDatabase > > Can you post your branch again? > > Maybe Norbert will review it and see if it satisfies his need? > > I'll try to review it too. Has anyone found time in the last 18 months to l

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

Hallo Andy, I checked it and I am working with the patch Jason posted on two machines with the changes, without having any problem. I see no reason why not to include it in 2.7 and master. Norbert That was the patch from Jason: --- a/configs/common/linuxcnc.nml +++ b/configs/common/linuxcnc.nm

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

On 22 February 2015 at 17:12, Sebastian Kuzminsky wrote: >> http://wiki.linuxcnc.org/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?ToolDatabase > > Can you post your branch again? > > Maybe Norbert will review it and see if it satisfies his need? > > I'll try to review it too. This came up again on the Forum. Any opinions?

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

On 23 February 2015 at 18:20, Niemand Sonst wrote: > I do like Andys patch more, because the database could easily be adapted > to modern needs. > I don't like that patch because it is too untidy, but I think it is a step in the right direction. As you point out, the advantage of a database is

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

Hallo Seb, I did not have any time to look at the patch, maybe the weekend will bring some light into my business :-( I do like Andys patch more, because the database could easily be adapted to modern needs. IMHO a tool table should contain: - Tool Number - Pocket Number - Diameter - Length -

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

On 2/22/15 10:50 PM, Jason Penn wrote: > Here's the patch to make the tool table larger. A downside to this is that > it makes the status structure larger. Norbert and David Armstrong, does Jason's patch satisfy your needs? Or how about Andy's? -- Sebastian Kuzminsky -

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 4:25 PM, Kirk Wallace wrote: > On 02/22/2015 01:11 PM, andy pugh wrote: > ... snip > >> I abandoned it to a large extent because it was only half of what I wanted >> to do. For instance it has none of the extra capability that the proposed >> database layout in the wiki pa

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

On 02/22/2015 02:25 PM, Kirk Wallace wrote: > On 02/22/2015 01:11 PM, andy pugh wrote: > ... snip >> I abandoned it to a large extent because it was only half of what I >> wanted >> to do. For instance it has none of the extra capability that the proposed >> database layout in the wiki page has. >>

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

On 02/22/2015 01:11 PM, andy pugh wrote: ... snip I abandoned it to a large extent because it was only half of what I wanted to do. For instance it has none of the extra capability that the proposed database layout in the wiki page has. (Possibly worth mentioning that that database layout was lar

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

On 22 February 2015 at 17:12, Sebastian Kuzminsky wrote: > Can you post your branch again? > > Maybe Norbert will review it and see if it satisfies his need? > OK, I have pushed it to a new branch. I have to admit that it has been a long time since I looked at it. And I seem to have broken the

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

On 02/22/2015 12:16 PM, Niemand Sonst wrote: > please post your branch, I will review it as much as it is in my > possibilities. > I can not understand, why it is not fixed, your suggestion is from 2013. > Seb, what happened? Because nobody made time to review it. > One more question, related t

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

Calling things stupid and trying to intimidate the developers with kindergarten insults usually is not very productive in an open source project... I know I should do as others and just ignore stupid comments but every now and then I can't. JT On 2/22/2015 1:16 PM, Niemand Sonst wrote: > @Andy

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

Jeff Johnson - Reply message - From: "Niemand Sonst" To: Subject: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit Date: Sun, Feb 22, 2015 2:16 PM @Andy, please post your branch, I will review it as much as it is in my possibilities. I can not understand, why it is not fixed, your suggestion is fr

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

@Andy, please post your branch, I will review it as much as it is in my possibilities. I can not understand, why it is not fixed, your suggestion is from 2013. Seb, what happened? One more question, related to: -- he whole thing is rather complicated by the fa

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

i need this to , it's quite restricting for a few of my machines On 22 February 2015 at 17:12, Sebastian Kuzminsky wrote: > On 02/22/2015 09:14 AM, andy pugh wrote: > > On 22 February 2015 at 16:12, andy pugh wrote: > > > >> > >> On 22 February 2015 at 16:03, Niemand Sonst wrote: > >> > >>> W

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

On 02/22/2015 09:14 AM, andy pugh wrote: > On 22 February 2015 at 16:12, andy pugh wrote: > >> >> On 22 February 2015 at 16:03, Niemand Sonst wrote: >> >>> Who knows: >>> - Why do we have that limit, the tool.tbl does accept more tools! >>> - How to fix that! >>> >> >> I fixed it, nobody cared.

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

On 22 February 2015 at 16:45, Gene Heskett wrote: > instructs the operator to put that tool in > pocket # such and such in the ATC, (replacing the least used tool if its > full) but an unlimited (by disk space only) table on the disk. > The whole thing is rather complicated by the fact that tool

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

On Sunday, February 22, 2015 11:17:53 AM Dave Caroline wrote: > I think the limit is derived from the message size (send all tools in > one message) it should just send tools used/changed and an index > number so the tool table can be sent over a number of massages as > needed > > Dave > That wou

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

I think the limit is derived from the message size (send all tools in one message) it should just send tools used/changed and an index number so the tool table can be sent over a number of massages as needed Dave On 22/02/2015, Niemand Sonst wrote: > Hallo, > > we do introduce with 2.7 the new t

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

On 22 February 2015 at 16:03, Niemand Sonst wrote: > Who knows: > - Why do we have that limit, the tool.tbl does accept more tools! > - How to fix that! > I fixed it, nobody cared. I gave up. -- atp If you can't fix it, you don't own it. http://www.ifixit.com/Manifesto ---

Re: [Emc-developers] Tool Number limit

On 22 February 2015 at 16:12, andy pugh wrote: > > On 22 February 2015 at 16:03, Niemand Sonst wrote: > >> Who knows: >> - Why do we have that limit, the tool.tbl does accept more tools! >> - How to fix that! >> > > I fixed it, nobody cared. I gave up. > http://wiki.linuxcnc.org/cgi-bin/wiki.pl