Searching \ for 'Opinions and availability of Linux development too' in subject line. ()
Make payments with PayPal - it's fast, free and secure! Help us get a faster server
FAQ page: www.piclist.com/techref/index.htm?key=opinions+availability
Search entire site for: 'Opinions and availability of Linux development too'.

Truncated match.
PICList Thread
'Opinions and availability of Linux development too'
1999\06\07@161345 by Craig Lee

flavicon
face
I am sick and tired of the sluggish response of my
windows development and productivity-NOT tools. I
really don't believe that a Pentium 166 with 64MB of
memory should run as slow as my 286 did back 11 years
ago!

Those of you who are successfully using Linux tools
for microcontroller development in C, could you
respond to me with your comments.

Thanks,

Craig

1999\06\07@170131 by Michael Shiloh

flavicon
face
>Those of you who are successfully using Linux tools
>for microcontroller development in C, could you
>respond to me with your comments.

I use the C2C C-Compiler free from:

http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Network/3656/c2c/c.html

the gpasm assembler free from:

http://reality.sgi.com/jamesb/gpasm/

Finally since my programmer is a PicStart I have to use the MPLAB software
to program. I use ftp to move the hex file from my Linux system to my
Windows 95 system.

If I could use the PicStart from Linux I would do that too.


If I could find an open source C compiler I would switch to it. Gpasm
didn't support my processor (16C63A) so I just went into the source,
added what I needed, and recompiled. Worked fine. The author of gpasm
was very good about indicating how to add additional processors.

Had the C2C compiler not supported my processor, I would have been stuck.

Michael

1999\06\07@170144 by Byron A Jeff

face picon face
>
> I am sick and tired of the sluggish response of my
> windows development and productivity-NOT tools. I
> really don't believe that a Pentium 166 with 64MB of
> memory should run as slow as my 286 did back 11 years
> ago!
>
> Those of you who are successfully using Linux tools
> for microcontroller development in C, could you
> respond to me with your comments.

It's different. It's sparse. It's command line. It's Linux.

Your major resource is the Gnupic archive: http://reality.sgi.com/jamesb/gnupic

One of my students built a Tait-style 16C84 programmer for our lab. We use
picprog2.2 (in the programmers section) to program it. It has a configurable
and savable parallel port interface.

Assembly is done using gpasm. Please don't use the ancient assembler written
by me and my students listed on the assembler page. It hasn't been updated
in about 5 years.

gpsim is a excellent simulation environment. I told Scott that the pin
simulation interface needed to be simplified. He said he'd look into it.
May already have been updated since the last time I used it.

Pick your favorite Linux/Unix editor and head for the hills.

There's no integrated IDE but it's a usable setup.

BAJ

1999\06\07@173110 by Stephen Buckser

flavicon
face
Craig,

How long does it take you to compile or assemble your PIC program? More than 3
minutes?

I would question whether an improvement in compiler, assembler, or editor speeds
that you might obtain from Linus tools would outweigh the advantage of using the
MicroChip integrated development environment.

Steve Buckser




Craig Lee <spam_OUTcleeTakeThisOuTspamATTCANADA.NET> on 06/07/99 01:06:58 PM

Please respond to pic microcontroller discussion list <.....PICLISTKILLspamspam@spam@MITVMA.MIT.EDU>

To:   PICLISTspamKILLspamMITVMA.MIT.EDU
cc:    (bcc: Steve Buckser/Marketing/San Leandro/Prescolite)
Subject:  Opinions and availability of Linux development tools for PIC




I am sick and tired of the sluggish response of my
windows development and productivity-NOT tools. I
really don't believe that a Pentium 166 with 64MB of
memory should run as slow as my 286 did back 11 years
ago!

Those of you who are successfully using Linux tools
for microcontroller development in C, could you
respond to me with your comments.

Thanks,

Craig

1999\06\07@180037 by Dan Winker

flavicon
face
On Mon, Jun 07, 1999 at 02:06:58PM -0600, Craig Lee wrote:
> Those of you who are successfully using Linux tools
> for microcontroller development in C, could you
> respond to me with your comments.

I'm using the C2C compiler for Linux.  The Linux version is free for
non-commercial use, although I paid the $35 so I can ask for features
and fixes and stuff.  Pavel (apparently the sole author) is very good
about such things.  <A HREF="www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Network/3656
/c2c/c.html">C2C C-compiler</A>

GNU make is wonderful, but of course you knew that.  CVS is the other
main reason I want to use Linux.  Vim is my editor of choice, but I'm
old fashioned.

I'm working with the SX chip.  As far as I know there isn't a good
command line assembler for the SX chip - DOS or Linux.  I use C2C's
built in assembler when I need to do assembly.  It's not near as
powerful as what you expect from an external assembler, but it does
get the job done.  I'm waiting for someone (other than me) to fix up
gpasm to work with the SX.  That with C2C and make will be great.

For simulating I use SxSim in a Linux DOS box.  gpsim doesn't support
SX.  I haven't programmed any hardware yet, but I'm not to worried
about it.  (That's because I'm using the SX chip).  I've seen a couple
of SX programmer designs that have source code.  I'm sure it will be
an easy port - or if I'm lazy, will work in a DOS box.

That's about it.  2 years ago I quit smoking.  Now I'm Microsoft free.
It's good to be alive.

Dan

1999\06\07@192835 by Craig Lee

flavicon
face
That link doesn't seem to work, and for editor, is EMACS available?

Craig

{Quote hidden}

http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Network/3656/c2c/c.html

the gpasm assembler free from:

http://reality.sgi.com/jamesb/gpasm/

Finally since my programmer is a PicStart I have to use the MPLAB software
to program. I use ftp to move the hex file from my Linux system to my
Windows 95 system.

If I could use the PicStart from Linux I would do that too.


If I could find an open source C compiler I would switch to it. Gpasm
didn't support my processor (16C63A) so I just went into the source,
added what I needed, and recompiled. Worked fine. The author of gpasm
was very good about indicating how to add additional processors.

Had the C2C compiler not supported my processor, I would have been stuck.

Michael

1999\06\07@193254 by Craig Lee

flavicon
face
That link  is broken too.

Craig

{Quote hidden}

1999\06\07@195553 by Michael Shiloh

flavicon
face
>That link doesn't seem to work, and for editor, is EMACS available?

Which link? I tried both

       http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Network/3656/c2c/c.html

and

       http://reality.sgi.com/jamesb/gpasm/

and they both worked; the first one may be slow.

Emacs is very much available for linux.

Michael

1999\06\07@203411 by Scott Dattalo

face
flavicon
face
On Mon, 7 Jun 1999, Byron A Jeff wrote:

> In-Reply-To:  <19990607201014.PYU17315@craig> from "Craig Lee" at Jun 7,
>               99 02:06:58 pm
>
> >
> > I am sick and tired of the sluggish response of my
> > windows development and productivity-NOT tools. I
> > really don't believe that a Pentium 166 with 64MB of
> > memory should run as slow as my 286 did back 11 years
> > ago!
> >
> > Those of you who are successfully using Linux tools
> > for microcontroller development in C, could you
> > respond to me with your comments.
>
> It's different. It's sparse. It's command line. It's Linux.
>
> Your major resource is the Gnupic archive: http://reality.sgi.com/jamesb/gnupi
c

For those of you who subscribe to the (very inactive) gnupic mailing list
probably know that James Bowman (the author of gpasm) had disappear for
about 4 months. I finally have gotten in contact with him and it turns out
that he's changed jobs. One of things we discussed was moving the gnupic
web page (since his former employer is probably unaware that they're
hosting it on James' behalf) to a new domain: http://www.gnupic.org . So the
above link will soon be changing...

> One of my students built a Tait-style 16C84 programmer for our lab. We use
{Quote hidden}

I've been looking into it alright! But unfortunately I haven't really done
a whole lot in the way of pin simulation/stimuli. FYI, gpsim is up to rev
0.0.13 and I'm working feverishly on 0.0.14. But I'm having one hell of a
time sorting all of the possibilities and choosing a set of tools that are
most suitable for gpsim. In other words, I'm still wrestling with CORBA,
pthreads, gtk, gnome, ... Just when I get one thing working I take a step
back and say "hmm, this sucks".

So this is the way gpsim is on my computer at home:

I have the simulator "engine" which is basically the core stuff I've
worked on up until Jan of this year. There's the command line interface
that is nothing sort of atrocious - both in terms of ease of use and
coding style. And finally there is the beginnings of gtk/based gui.

I've all but given up hope of keeping gpsim dynamically separated from the
gui as I had originally desired. So the next release, 0.0.14, will consist
of compile time defined flags allowing the gui to be built or not. I
intend to use gnome's api to do all of the corba stuff for me. The good
news is that it makes my job easier, while the bad news is that it takes
oodles of resources (gpsim takes something like 4.7 meg of ram just
sitting there).

So to address Byron's suggestion: gpsim will have a simpler simulation
interface as I (and probably others too) begin to add more gui tools.
gnome and ORBit will be providing a dynamic interface to gpsim that will
allow external stimuli to be applied in such a way that gpsim doesn't have
to be recompiled. In other words, if somebody wishes to create an LCD
interface, they could write a Tcl app using Torb (a Tcl wrapper for ORBit)
and communicate to gpsim through some yet-to-be-defined-but-dynamic
interface.

> Pick your favorite Linux/Unix editor and head for the hills.
>
> There's no integrated IDE but it's a usable setup.

That's slowly changing...

1999\06\07@203611 by Bob Drzyzgula

flavicon
face
Which link? Both (c2c & gpasm) worked for me just now.

As for editors, if there is anything Linux has, it's
an embarrassment of text editors, including several
versions of Emacs: Gnu Emacs, X Emacs, Jonathon's Own
Version of Emacs (jove)... not that any of them hold
a candle to pretty much any complete version of vi. :-)

Hi-tech's PIC C compiler is available for Unix, but
I don't know if that includes Linux.

If you need a EDA software, the Linux version of Cadsoft's
Eagle -- see http://www.cadsoft.de -- is finally shipping.
I've tried it and it is virtually indistinguishable from
the Windows version... they did an excellent job.
If you want a fully free and open product, you can
also try gEDA -- http://www.geda.seul.org/ -- but
it is not yet complete (although they've made remarkable
progress).

Also, for programming the PIC, as long as you only need
to do 16F84s you can use PICPRG with most parallel port
programmers -- see http://www.tatoosh.com/nexus/picpgmr.shtml

I think that the biggest gap in the Linux development
enviornment for the PIC is the complete lack of any
support for in-circuit emulation. If you don't need
that, and you're comfortable in a Unix-type environment,
I think you can do pretty well.

It would be really great if someone like Tech Tools
would embrace the Linux platform; having an IDE like
TDE and an emulator like the CVM working under Linux
would make Linux into a very nice platform for PIC
development.

--Bob

On Mon, Jun 07, 1999 at 05:21:14PM -0600, Craig Lee wrote:
> That link doesn't seem to work, and for editor, is EMACS available?
>
> Craig
>
> > {Original Message removed}

1999\06\07@210554 by Andy Kunz

flavicon
face
>If I could find an open source C compiler I would switch to it. Gpasm
>didn't support my processor (16C63A) so I just went into the source,

I believe Carmacon (http://www.carmacon) will have their Linux-based tools
available shortly.  Try going there and asking them when.

Andy

==================================================================
            INTRODUCTORY PRICING ENDS JULY 1, 1999
==================================================================
Andy Kunz               Life is what we do to prepare for Eternity
------------------------------------------------------------------
KILLspamandyKILLspamspamrc-hydros.com      http://www.rc-hydros.com     - Race Boats
RemoveMEandyTakeThisOuTspammontanadesign.com  http://www.montanadesign.com - Electronics
==================================================================

1999\06\07@211837 by William Chops Westfield

face picon face
For those thinking of playing with linux, I've been trying a version out
recently that boots from a SINGLE floppy and provides a surprisingly
complete system (which is decompressed into ramdisks.) (for example, it
includes a version each of EMACS *and* VI, internet access with http and
ftp, and has man pages for some of the applications, all from one floppy.)

I think it runs with as little as 8M of ram, although my purpose is to have
something non-invasive that I can boot on a nominally W95 system with quite
a bit more (let's see - a 4M ramdisk for /usr, another for /, and a 10M
ramdisk for /tmp :-)  (runs real fast out of ramdisk, too.)   Nice for
getting your feet wet, too.

This is tomsrtbt or something like that - the main english linux
distributions page near http://www.linux.org will refer you there.  There are
assorted other floppy and ramdisk distributions (two and three disks) that
add more stuff (X, C compiler, etc.)  I'm wondering if such a linux will
replace DOS for all those sorts of applications that used to need their own
"boot disk." (on the dim side, it's not exactly QUICK loading up that whole
floppy.  About a full minute longer than booting W95 from the hard disk.)

BillW

1999\06\07@233235 by Bob Blick

face
flavicon
face
At 08:34 PM 6/7/99 -0400, you wrote:

>Hi-tech's PIC C compiler is available for Unix, but
>I don't know if that includes Linux.

Yes it does. Funny you should mention it, but the latest cd for the PC has
the linux version as well as the DOS version. I knew there was a reason to
have a dual-boot machine :-)

Way to go, Clyde!

1999\06\08@005310 by paulb

flavicon
face
William Chops Westfield wrote:

> For those thinking of playing with linux, I've been trying a version
> out recently that boots from a SINGLE floppy and provides a
> surprisingly complete system (which is decompressed into ramdisks.)

> This is tomsrtbt or something like that

 Presumably related to the LRP: http://www.psychosis.com/linux-router/

 I was impressed.  Not only does the complete router system reside on
the floppy, but it's actually a stand-alone development system that can
re-configure itself for different hardware.

 When I say "reconfigure itself", I don't mean automatically, but you
tell it to re-build according to the desired options.  Using the in-
built editor to alter the configuration files.
--
 Cheers,
       Paul B.

1999\06\08@035409 by Dr. Imre Bartfai

flavicon
face
Hi,
for the same reason, I do all my PIC developments using Caldera's Open DOS
7.02. All works fine and swift. For service purposes, I have an old
notebook, a 486DX33 MHz, with 120 MB HDD and it does also the job (I use
PIC Basic Pro, and a compile time is about 1' . However, using SPASM, it
tends to zero.)
I hope this helps.
Imre


On Mon, 7 Jun 1999, Craig Lee wrote:

{Quote hidden}

1999\06\08@083301 by Walter Banks

picon face
> Those of you who are successfully using Linux tools
> for microcontroller development in C, could you
> respond to me with your comments.
> Craig

MPC will cleanly run under most DOS emulators including
those for MAC's, SUN's,  HP/UX and those available under
Linux. MPC DOS design rules are Version 3.3 or later.

Linux may very well seriously take off. The performance
increase on development work would be significant.
We review doing a Linux release once or twice a year


Walter Banks

More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 1999 , 2000 only
- Today
- New search...