Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.arch.embedded > #20606 > unrolled thread
| Started by | rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2015-04-02 21:08 -0400 |
| Last post | 2015-04-16 16:18 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 123 — 26 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.arch.embedded
Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-04-02 21:08 -0400
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad sbattazzo@gmail.com - 2015-04-13 16:18 -0700
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad sbattazzo@gmail.com - 2015-04-13 16:25 -0700
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad sbattazzo@gmail.com - 2015-04-13 16:33 -0700
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-04-13 21:45 -0400
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-04-13 21:47 -0400
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad sbattazzo@gmail.com - 2015-04-14 07:33 -0700
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-04-14 14:38 -0400
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-04-16 14:24 -0700
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-04-16 15:11 -0700
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-04-16 23:37 -0400
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-04-16 20:59 -0700
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad Mel Wilson <mwilson@the-wire.com> - 2015-04-17 13:16 +0000
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-04-17 00:19 -0400
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-04-16 21:56 -0700
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-04-17 14:47 -0400
WAS: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad IS: Thunderbird Line Breaking rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-04-17 15:12 -0400
Re: WAS: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad IS: Thunderbird Line Breaking Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2015-04-17 20:14 +0000
Re: WAS: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad IS: Thunderbird Line Breaking rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-04-17 16:59 -0400
Re: WAS: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad IS: Thunderbird Line Breaking David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-04-18 10:00 +0200
Re: WAS: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad IS: Thunderbird Line Breaking rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-04-18 09:32 -0400
Re: WAS: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad IS: Thunderbird Line Breaking Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2015-04-18 15:15 +0000
Re: WAS: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad IS: Thunderbird Line Breaking rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-04-18 11:31 -0400
Re: WAS: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad IS: Thunderbird Line Breaking Niklas Holsti <niklas.holsti@tidorum.invalid> - 2015-04-18 19:21 +0300
Re: WAS: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad IS: Thunderbird Line Breaking rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-04-19 16:39 -0400
Re: WAS: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad IS: Thunderbird Line Breaking Alan Adams <alan@adamshome.org.uk> - 2015-04-18 18:52 +0100
Re: WAS: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad IS: Thunderbird Line Breaking "Rod Pemberton" <bork@lllljunkqwer.cpm> - 2015-04-18 18:55 -0400
Re: WAS: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad IS: Thunderbird Line Breaking The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2015-04-19 09:13 +0100
Re: WAS: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad IS: Thunderbird Line Breaking Dimiter_Popoff <dp@tgi-sci.com> - 2015-04-19 13:22 +0300
Re: WAS: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad IS: Thunderbird Line Breaking David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-04-19 22:09 +0200
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad mm0fmf <none@mailinator.com> - 2015-04-17 21:15 +0100
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-04-17 17:02 -0400
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad mm0fmf <none@mailinator.com> - 2015-04-18 17:06 +0100
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-04-19 16:57 -0400
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad Alan Adams <alan@adamshome.org.uk> - 2015-04-20 09:33 +0100
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad mm0fmf <none@mailinator.com> - 2015-04-20 18:03 +0100
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-04-21 01:16 -0400
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-04-17 20:20 -0400
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-04-17 17:24 -0700
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-04-17 20:40 -0400
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-04-17 17:57 -0700
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad Mel Wilson <mwilson@the-wire.com> - 2015-04-18 02:14 +0000
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-04-18 02:05 -0400
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-04-18 10:16 +0200
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-04-18 09:56 -0400
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-04-18 17:46 +0200
USB serial ports, was: Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> - 2015-04-18 18:34 +0000
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-04-18 10:04 +0200
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad Jan Coombs <Jan-54 <jenfhaomndgfwutc@murmic.plus.com>> - 2015-04-18 09:38 +0100
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-04-18 11:04 -0400
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-04-18 17:54 +0200
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad hal-usenet@ip-64-139-1-69.sjc.megapath.net (Hal Murray) - 2015-04-18 15:36 -0500
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad Theo Markettos <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> - 2015-04-23 07:59 +0100
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-04-25 14:35 -0400
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-04-25 15:44 -0400
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-05-08 12:00 -0400
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-05-10 03:36 -0400
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad Theo Markettos <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> - 2015-05-10 10:32 +0100
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad Tauno Voipio <tauno.voipio@notused.fi.invalid> - 2015-05-10 12:56 +0300
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-05-10 10:48 -0400
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2015-05-10 16:05 +0100
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> - 2015-05-10 23:26 +0000
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> - 2015-05-10 09:37 +0000
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-05-10 11:16 -0400
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> - 2015-05-10 23:42 +0000
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-05-11 02:17 -0400
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2015-05-10 11:41 +0000
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad Theo Markettos <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> - 2015-05-10 16:56 +0100
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-05-10 13:01 -0400
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad lasselangwadtchristensen@gmail.com - 2015-04-18 12:13 -0700
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad stephen@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2015-04-18 19:22 +0000
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-04-19 17:04 -0400
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad Tauno Voipio <tauno.voipio@notused.fi.invalid> - 2015-04-20 13:24 +0300
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-04-22 13:23 -0400
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad Dimiter_Popoff <dp@tgi-sci.com> - 2015-04-22 20:44 +0300
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-04-22 13:51 -0400
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad Waldek Hebisch <hebisch@math.uni.wroc.pl> - 2015-04-22 19:10 +0000
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-04-22 15:31 -0400
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad Waldek Hebisch <hebisch@math.uni.wroc.pl> - 2015-04-23 02:08 +0000
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad Waldek Hebisch <hebisch@math.uni.wroc.pl> - 2015-04-24 02:52 +0000
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-04-25 14:40 -0400
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-04-25 15:42 -0400
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad sbattazzo@gmail.com - 2015-04-21 09:34 -0700
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-04-22 14:57 -0400
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-04-22 15:35 -0400
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2015-04-17 10:52 +0000
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad Dimiter_Popoff <dp@tgi-sci.com> - 2015-04-17 14:05 +0300
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-04-17 07:56 -0700
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-04-17 17:26 +0200
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-04-17 17:01 +0000
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad Blajrs Jrolrsen <boegre@no.com> - 2015-04-17 13:36 +0000
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-04-17 14:42 +0000
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad Hans-Bernhard Bröker <HBBroeker@t-online.de> - 2015-04-18 00:25 +0200
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-04-17 20:03 -0400
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-04-17 17:14 -0700
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-04-17 20:26 -0400
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-04-17 17:32 -0700
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-04-17 20:47 -0400
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2015-04-18 08:47 +0000
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-04-18 11:19 -0400
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2015-04-18 15:52 +0000
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-04-19 17:07 -0400
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-06-09 03:04 -0400
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-04-18 00:11 -0500
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-04-18 10:32 +0200
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-04-18 11:26 -0400
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-04-18 17:57 +0200
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-04-18 09:42 -0700
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-04-19 17:11 -0400
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad Hans-Bernhard Bröker <HBBroeker@t-online.de> - 2015-04-18 12:19 +0200
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad Dimiter_Popoff <dp@tgi-sci.com> - 2015-04-18 15:16 +0300
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-04-18 19:57 +0200
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad Dimiter_Popoff <dp@tgi-sci.com> - 2015-04-18 23:11 +0300
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-04-19 21:32 +0200
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad Dimiter_Popoff <dp@tgi-sci.com> - 2015-04-19 23:04 +0300
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-04-18 09:15 +0000
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-04-18 12:17 +0200
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-04-18 13:08 +0000
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-04-18 20:17 +0200
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-04-20 15:33 +0000
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-04-17 14:52 -0400
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2015-04-17 20:06 +0000
Re: Mecrisp on the TI Stellaris Launchpad lasselangwadtchristensen@gmail.com - 2015-04-16 16:18 -0700
Page 5 of 7 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 Next page →
| From | rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-04-25 14:40 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <mhgn1s$8d6$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #20790 |
On 4/23/2015 10:52 PM, Waldek Hebisch wrote: > In comp.lang.forth Waldek Hebisch <hebisch@math.uni.wroc.pl> wrote: >> In comp.lang.forth rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On 4/22/2015 3:10 PM, Waldek Hebisch wrote: >>> >>> I'm not using gdb, just a terminal interface to the Forth that should be >>> running on the target processor already. >>> >> >> You wrote that you can not install a terminal emulator. What >> get wrong? For me >> >> apt-get install minicom >> >> worked as expected. Next >> >> minicom -b 115200 -o -D /dev/ttyACM0 >> >> connects me to mecrisp. All this on Banana Pi running Raspbian 7. >> >> There is a problem, namely mecrisp seem to emit lone linefeed >> at the end of line, while minicom expects to receive carrage >> return + linefeed pair. So one gets staicaise pattern on the >> screen. There is no obvious way to convince minicom to treat >> linefeed as line ending. I admit that I am surprised by this, >> I used minicom several times I never met such problem (apparently >> any other source emits carrage returns). >> > > I tried another program, that is microcom: > > apt-get install microcom > > installs it, then > > microcom -p /dev/ttyACM0 > > connects me to mecrisp. It seems to work fine (unlike mincom there > is no staircaise pattern). > > BTW: Both commands as root. To use as ordinary users one needs > to set permissions as described in other posts. To answer your earlier question the problem was a short between the headphones. I was calling it miniterm rather than minicom. lol I reached the point you describe where Mecrisp is not sending a CR with the LF and minicom can't seem to deal with that or Putty either oddly enough. I guess there is something about an SSH session that interferes with this. I will try microcom (and not microterm, lol) -- Rick
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-04-25 15:42 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <mhgqlu$nne$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #20796 |
On 4/25/2015 2:40 PM, rickman wrote: > On 4/23/2015 10:52 PM, Waldek Hebisch wrote: >> In comp.lang.forth Waldek Hebisch <hebisch@math.uni.wroc.pl> wrote: >>> In comp.lang.forth rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> On 4/22/2015 3:10 PM, Waldek Hebisch wrote: >>>> >>>> I'm not using gdb, just a terminal interface to the Forth that >>>> should be >>>> running on the target processor already. >>>> >>> >>> You wrote that you can not install a terminal emulator. What >>> get wrong? For me >>> >>> apt-get install minicom >>> >>> worked as expected. Next >>> >>> minicom -b 115200 -o -D /dev/ttyACM0 >>> >>> connects me to mecrisp. All this on Banana Pi running Raspbian 7. >>> >>> There is a problem, namely mecrisp seem to emit lone linefeed >>> at the end of line, while minicom expects to receive carrage >>> return + linefeed pair. So one gets staicaise pattern on the >>> screen. There is no obvious way to convince minicom to treat >>> linefeed as line ending. I admit that I am surprised by this, >>> I used minicom several times I never met such problem (apparently >>> any other source emits carrage returns). >>> >> >> I tried another program, that is microcom: >> >> apt-get install microcom >> >> installs it, then >> >> microcom -p /dev/ttyACM0 >> >> connects me to mecrisp. It seems to work fine (unlike mincom there >> is no staircaise pattern). >> >> BTW: Both commands as root. To use as ordinary users one needs >> to set permissions as described in other posts. > > To answer your earlier question the problem was a short between the > headphones. I was calling it miniterm rather than minicom. lol > > I reached the point you describe where Mecrisp is not sending a CR with > the LF and minicom can't seem to deal with that or Putty either oddly > enough. I guess there is something about an SSH session that interferes > with this. > > I will try microcom (and not microterm, lol) Yep, that did the trick. Now I just need to learn Mecrisp. -- Rick
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | sbattazzo@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-04-21 09:34 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <3ee991b8-d43f-4d9c-9876-b65c8c0a6a3f@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #20746 |
On Sunday, April 19, 2015 at 2:04:31 PM UTC-7, rickman wrote: > On 4/18/2015 3:22 PM, Stephen Pelc wrote: > > On Fri, 17 Apr 2015 00:19:42 -0400, rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> Seems they did a poor job on power distribution on the > >> original design. The rPi 2 model B is supposed to be better. It can > >> also be used for real PC work... like web browsing. > > > > The B2 is significantly faster than the B+, even for single core > > apps. We are using Raspbian. > > > >> Now I have to figure out how to get a terminal emulator working on the > >> rPi. Can't be too hard... I just have to research it on my laptop > >> rather than on the rPi. > > > > The "standard" Linux terminal program is minicom. > > > > You will get far less noise in responses if you post the Linux > > questions on a Raspberry Pi group. RPi respondes seem to be much > > nicer than the average Lunux person. Similarly, I get much better > > Google responses when Raspberry Pi is included in the search request. > > Thanks. I've been trying to get minicom installed and have not figured > it out. I have crossposted to the rpi group, but some folks don't > crosspost their replies which is ok with me. So I am discussing this > there as well. > > -- > > Rick Rick, if you're using Debian or Ubuntu on the pi then you should be able to install minicom with apt-get install out of the box. Otherwise I think it can pretty easily be installed from source in exactly the same way as the lm4flash thing.. just grab the source off of sourceforge or github or wherever it's being hosted, type "make", and maybe "make install" if the Makefile has that option, and it will copy the executable and man files into the right path. However if you're using the monitor/keyboard/mouse on the pi, then I might recommend gtkterm instead as it has a graphical menu with drop-downs and pop up boxes, where as minicom requires you to use a bunch of shortcut keys to tweak the settings.. once again apt-get install should do the job. Similarly I like gedit as a text editor, it's a bit notepad-like but has syntax highlighting and some other helpful features. Not the most full-featured, but at least it doesn't make you do keyboard commands to navigate through different modes to get things done. Getting the software tools you need on a Linux environment isn't all that bad, most of the time it's a matter of seeing if it's in the repositories, maybe adding a new repository to your sources list, or as a last resort downloading the source and installing. On something like Raspberry Pi the remaining issue is whether or not the software you want actually supports ARM, but with so many platforms being ARM based, I think that will continue to be less of an issue as time moves forward.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-04-22 14:57 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <mh8qtr$nt6$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #20768 |
On 4/21/2015 12:34 PM, sbattazzo@gmail.com wrote: > On Sunday, April 19, 2015 at 2:04:31 PM UTC-7, rickman wrote: >> On 4/18/2015 3:22 PM, Stephen Pelc wrote: >>> On Fri, 17 Apr 2015 00:19:42 -0400, rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Seems they did a poor job on power distribution on the >>>> original design. The rPi 2 model B is supposed to be better. It can >>>> also be used for real PC work... like web browsing. >>> >>> The B2 is significantly faster than the B+, even for single core >>> apps. We are using Raspbian. >>> >>>> Now I have to figure out how to get a terminal emulator working on the >>>> rPi. Can't be too hard... I just have to research it on my laptop >>>> rather than on the rPi. >>> >>> The "standard" Linux terminal program is minicom. >>> >>> You will get far less noise in responses if you post the Linux >>> questions on a Raspberry Pi group. RPi respondes seem to be much >>> nicer than the average Lunux person. Similarly, I get much better >>> Google responses when Raspberry Pi is included in the search request. >> >> Thanks. I've been trying to get minicom installed and have not figured >> it out. I have crossposted to the rpi group, but some folks don't >> crosspost their replies which is ok with me. So I am discussing this >> there as well. >> >> -- >> >> Rick > > Rick, if you're using Debian or Ubuntu on the pi then you should be able to install minicom with apt-get install out of the box. Otherwise I think it can pretty easily be installed from source in exactly the same way as the lm4flash thing.. just grab the source off of sourceforge or github or wherever it's being hosted, type "make", and maybe "make install" if the Makefile has that option, and it will copy the executable and man files into the right path. > > However if you're using the monitor/keyboard/mouse on the pi, then I might recommend gtkterm instead as it has a graphical menu with drop-downs and pop up boxes, where as minicom requires you to use a bunch of shortcut keys to tweak the settings.. once again apt-get install should do the job. > Similarly I like gedit as a text editor, it's a bit notepad-like but has syntax highlighting and some other helpful features. Not the most full-featured, but at least it doesn't make you do keyboard commands to navigate through different modes to get things done. > > Getting the software tools you need on a Linux environment isn't all that bad, most of the time it's a matter of seeing if it's in the repositories, maybe adding a new repository to your sources list, or as a last resort downloading the source and installing. On something like Raspberry Pi the remaining issue is whether or not the software you want actually supports ARM, but with so many platforms being ARM based, I think that will continue to be less of an issue as time moves forward. Thanks for the advice. For now I am punting and working under Windows just to get the project moving along. But that is no greased slide either as the TI drivers for the launchpad won't install under Win 8 without some pain. So I've ordered a couple of STM Discovery board which have an ST-link on board and hopefully will just work. While I wait for delivery I will try installing the drivers and getting ready to move ahead. -- Rick
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-04-22 15:35 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <mh8t44$143$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #20768 |
On 4/21/2015 12:34 PM, sbattazzo@gmail.com wrote: > On Sunday, April 19, 2015 at 2:04:31 PM UTC-7, rickman wrote: >> On 4/18/2015 3:22 PM, Stephen Pelc wrote: >>> On Fri, 17 Apr 2015 00:19:42 -0400, rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Seems they did a poor job on power distribution on the >>>> original design. The rPi 2 model B is supposed to be better. It can >>>> also be used for real PC work... like web browsing. >>> >>> The B2 is significantly faster than the B+, even for single core >>> apps. We are using Raspbian. >>> >>>> Now I have to figure out how to get a terminal emulator working on the >>>> rPi. Can't be too hard... I just have to research it on my laptop >>>> rather than on the rPi. >>> >>> The "standard" Linux terminal program is minicom. >>> >>> You will get far less noise in responses if you post the Linux >>> questions on a Raspberry Pi group. RPi respondes seem to be much >>> nicer than the average Lunux person. Similarly, I get much better >>> Google responses when Raspberry Pi is included in the search request. >> >> Thanks. I've been trying to get minicom installed and have not figured >> it out. I have crossposted to the rpi group, but some folks don't >> crosspost their replies which is ok with me. So I am discussing this >> there as well. >> >> -- >> >> Rick > > Rick, if you're using Debian or Ubuntu on the pi then you should be able to install minicom with apt-get install out of the box. Otherwise I think it can pretty easily be installed from source in exactly the same way as the lm4flash thing.. just grab the source off of sourceforge or github or wherever it's being hosted, type "make", and maybe "make install" if the Makefile has that option, and it will copy the executable and man files into the right path. > > However if you're using the monitor/keyboard/mouse on the pi, then I might recommend gtkterm instead as it has a graphical menu with drop-downs and pop up boxes, where as minicom requires you to use a bunch of shortcut keys to tweak the settings.. once again apt-get install should do the job. > Similarly I like gedit as a text editor, it's a bit notepad-like but has syntax highlighting and some other helpful features. Not the most full-featured, but at least it doesn't make you do keyboard commands to navigate through different modes to get things done. > > Getting the software tools you need on a Linux environment isn't all that bad, most of the time it's a matter of seeing if it's in the repositories, maybe adding a new repository to your sources list, or as a last resort downloading the source and installing. On something like Raspberry Pi the remaining issue is whether or not the software you want actually supports ARM, but with so many platforms being ARM based, I think that will continue to be less of an issue as time moves forward. BTW, I am running Raspian out of the box. The whole rPi thing was given to me by a friend who got it from work when they decided it wasn't useful for them. Even if I don't use it for this project, I plan to return to the rPi and Linux on some other project. It can't really be all that hard to learn. -- Rick
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-04-17 10:52 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <5530e603$0$21217$e4fe514c@dreader37.news.xs4all.nl> |
| In reply to | #20662 |
In article <mgpv33$469$1@dont-email.me>, rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote:
>On 4/16/2015 6:11 PM, Paul Rubin wrote:
>> rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> writes:
>>> compile, but I can't seem to figure out how to run it. I type
>>> lm4flash at the command line, but it says "command not found". The
>>> file has no visible extension. Is that expected? What am I missing?
>>
>> Try ./lm4flash
>
>Yes, I figured that out. It seems the current working directory is not
>considered under Linux for finding executables... really!?
Not correct. The PATH for finding executables is fully under control.
It is urban legend that there is a security leak by having de current
directory in the PATH. ("someone could have sneaked an ls in your directory
that installs a rootkit.") This is nonsensical for normal users.
So blame the idiots that have nothing better to do than this, not linux, and
put the line
PATH=".:$PATH"
in your profile.
If you're still a bit worried, you could do
PATH="$PATH:."
and refrain from doing it for the root user (assuming
you've ditched sudo).
This should be in the Unix FAQ.
<SNIP>
>
>--
>
>Rick
--
Albert van der Horst, UTRECHT,THE NETHERLANDS
Economic growth -- being exponential -- ultimately falters.
albert@spe&ar&c.xs4all.nl &=n http://home.hccnet.nl/a.w.m.van.der.horst
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Dimiter_Popoff <dp@tgi-sci.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-04-17 14:05 +0300 |
| Message-ID | <mgqpb6$mrm$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #20666 |
On 17.4.2015 г. 13:52, Albert van der Horst wrote:
> In article <mgpv33$469$1@dont-email.me>, rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 4/16/2015 6:11 PM, Paul Rubin wrote:
>>> rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> writes:
>>>> compile, but I can't seem to figure out how to run it. I type
>>>> lm4flash at the command line, but it says "command not found". The
>>>> file has no visible extension. Is that expected? What am I missing?
>>>
>>> Try ./lm4flash
>>
>> Yes, I figured that out. It seems the current working directory is not
>> considered under Linux for finding executables... really!?
>
> Not correct. The PATH for finding executables is fully under control.
> It is urban legend that there is a security leak by having de current
> directory in the PATH. ("someone could have sneaked an ls in your directory
> that installs a rootkit.") This is nonsensical for normal users.
> So blame the idiots that have nothing better to do than this, not linux, and
> put the line
> PATH=".:$PATH"
> in your profile.
I think what Rick was saying is that the current directory is not
searched for executables in unix, not that it cannot be made to be
searched.
Even I know it can be made (and once I knew how....), and I am not
a unix user much more than a windows one (i.e. I can use either as
a computerized TV set but not much beyond that).
Dimiter
------------------------------------------------------
Dimiter Popoff, TGI http://www.tgi-sci.com
------------------------------------------------------
http://www.flickr.com/photos/didi_tgi/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-04-17 07:56 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <87618u951u.fsf@jester.gateway.pace.com> |
| In reply to | #20666 |
albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) writes:
> Not correct. The PATH for finding executables is fully under control.
> It is urban legend that there is a security leak by having de current
> directory in the PATH. ("someone could have sneaked an ls in your directory
> that installs a rootkit.")
No it wasn't an urban legend, it was a real issue. In the old days "."
was the first thing on the path and there were actual incidents of what
you described. E.g. you'd be a sysadmin of some university timesharing
system, you'd get told that some student had porn in his home directory,
you'd cd to the directory and type "ls" as root, and hilarity ensues. I
think there is a paper by Fred Grampp about this, that introduced the
practice of getting "." off of the standard path.
> This is nonsensical for normal users.
I'd say it's still not nonsensical: you unpack an archive, cd to it and
type "ls", same situation. Or even in non-malicious cases, someone
might have chosen a program name that wasn't a standard Unix command,
but that happened to match something that you used and was on your path.
Like I think there are at least 2 different Forth implementations called
pforth. So maybe you use one of them and the directory you cd to has
the other one, so you type "pforth" and get the wrong one, etc.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-04-17 17:26 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <mgr8ln$gt0$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #20670 |
On 17/04/15 16:56, Paul Rubin wrote:
> albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) writes:
>> Not correct. The PATH for finding executables is fully under control.
>> It is urban legend that there is a security leak by having de current
>> directory in the PATH. ("someone could have sneaked an ls in your directory
>> that installs a rootkit.")
>
> No it wasn't an urban legend, it was a real issue. In the old days "."
> was the first thing on the path and there were actual incidents of what
> you described. E.g. you'd be a sysadmin of some university timesharing
> system, you'd get told that some student had porn in his home directory,
> you'd cd to the directory and type "ls" as root, and hilarity ensues. I
> think there is a paper by Fred Grampp about this, that introduced the
> practice of getting "." off of the standard path.
>
>> This is nonsensical for normal users.
>
> I'd say it's still not nonsensical: you unpack an archive, cd to it and
> type "ls", same situation. Or even in non-malicious cases, someone
> might have chosen a program name that wasn't a standard Unix command,
> but that happened to match something that you used and was on your path.
> Like I think there are at least 2 different Forth implementations called
> pforth. So maybe you use one of them and the directory you cd to has
> the other one, so you type "pforth" and get the wrong one, etc.
>
And while it is true that when running under a standard user, you cannot
easily install a rootkit (the malicious program would have to persuade
you to do a "sudo" or similar), you can make a real mess without that.
Albert, try putting this in a file called "ls", with the executable flag
set:
#!/bin/bash
rm -rf ~/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-04-17 17:01 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <mgre9e$3qv$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #20670 |
In comp.arch.embedded Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) writes:
>> Not correct. The PATH for finding executables is fully under control.
>> It is urban legend that there is a security leak by having de current
>> directory in the PATH. ("someone could have sneaked an ls in your directory
>> that installs a rootkit.")
> No it wasn't an urban legend, it was a real issue. In the old days "."
> was the first thing on the path and there were actual incidents of what
> you described. E.g. you'd be a sysadmin of some university timesharing
> system, you'd get told that some student had porn in his home directory,
> you'd cd to the directory and type "ls" as root, and hilarity ensues. I
> think there is a paper by Fred Grampp about this, that introduced the
> practice of getting "." off of the standard path.
OK, so at least you should put the . at the end of the path.
That will still surprise you if you name your program the same
as a system program, though.
>> This is nonsensical for normal users.
> I'd say it's still not nonsensical: you unpack an archive, cd to it and
> type "ls", same situation. Or even in non-malicious cases, someone
> might have chosen a program name that wasn't a standard Unix command,
> but that happened to match something that you used and was on your path.
> Like I think there are at least 2 different Forth implementations called
> pforth. So maybe you use one of them and the directory you cd to has
> the other one, so you type "pforth" and get the wrong one, etc.
By now, I have gotten used to putting ./ in front of names.
Especially interesting is:
./!$
for ordinary users on systems with no public users, and who don't
download files without looking at the names, . at the end should
be safe enough. For root, it probably isn't safe enough.
As far as I know, MSDOS and its successor, Windows, have an
implied . at the beginning of the path.
-- glen
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Blajrs Jrolrsen <boegre@no.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-04-17 13:36 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <mgr288$4dr$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #20662 |
On 2015-04-17, rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote: > On 4/16/2015 6:11 PM, Paul Rubin wrote: >> rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> writes: >>> compile, but I can't seem to figure out how to run it. I type >>> lm4flash at the command line, but it says "command not found". The >>> file has no visible extension. Is that expected? What am I missing? >> >> Try ./lm4flash > > Yes, I figured that out. It seems the current working directory is not > considered under Linux for finding executables... really!? Why would it be? Most of the directories where binaries are stored are called bin or sbin. For example /bin /sbin /usr/bin /usr/sbin /usr/local/bin /usr/local/sbin It is really not appropriate or orderly to have binaries in your home directory. The home directory is the top level directory for each user. It is expected to contain other directories in an organized manner. If you want to make a directory for binaries the normal way to do that is mkdir ~/bin # one time only export PATH=$PATH:~/bin # this goes in your logon proc depending on shell Blajrs
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-04-17 14:42 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <2015Apr17.164257@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> |
| In reply to | #20669 |
Blajrs Jrolrsen <boegre@no.com> writes:
>On 2015-04-17, rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Yes, I figured that out. It seems the current working directory is not
>> considered under Linux for finding executables... really!?
...
>It is really not appropriate or orderly to have binaries in your home
>directory. The home directory is the top level directory for each user. It
>is expected to contain other directories in an organized manner. If you want
>to make a directory for binaries the normal way to do that is
The home directory was not the issue here, the current working
directory was.
I think it has something to do with more usage of Unix/Linux by
non-programmers (to such an extent that they don't even write their
own shell scripts). They don't benefit from "." in the PATH at all,
so it was removed from the default. Programmers know how to add it
back.
In the old times, we had "." first in the PATH. If I am working on a
new version of Gforth, and am in the build directory of Gforth, then
saying "gforth" gives me the development version, not the installed
version.
That had a security disadvantage: If an attacker can get you to unpack
a package, and that package contains, say, an executable "ls", then,
if you are in the directory containing that executable and try to list
the files, you will execute the attacker's executable.
That disadvantage was worked around by removing the "." from the front
and putting it on the back of the PATH. This allows programmers to
call their programs in the current directory without "./", unless a
version of that program has been installed in another directory in the
PATH. I guess that, if you have that, you may start to use "./" a
lot, so then you can eliminate "." from the PATH completely.
- anton
--
M. Anton Ertl http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/anton/home.html
comp.lang.forth FAQs: http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/forth/faq/toc.html
New standard: http://www.forth200x.org/forth200x.html
EuroForth 2014: http://www.euroforth.org/ef14/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Hans-Bernhard Bröker <HBBroeker@t-online.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-04-18 00:25 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <cpdfipFne3kU1@mid.dfncis.de> |
| In reply to | #20671 |
Am 17.04.2015 um 16:42 schrieb Anton Ertl: > Blajrs Jrolrsen <boegre@no.com> writes: >> On 2015-04-17, rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote: >>> Yes, I figured that out. It seems the current working directory is not >>> considered under Linux for finding executables... really!? Yes, really. > I think it has something to do with more usage of Unix/Linux by > non-programmers (to such an extent that they don't even write their > own shell scripts). I don't think that argument works. There have been platforms where a very large fraction of users never wrote a program of their own. The biggest of those has to be Microsoft Windows, closely followed by MacOS. But Unix never was anywhere near the top of that category. I'm not aware of any system that encouraged users to write their own programs more strongly than Unix did: the whole "toolkit" paradigm almost forced _users_ to become programmers, at least at the shell script level. And how many other systems did come with a bona-fide HLL compiler right there in the box? > In the old times, we had "." first in the PATH. If I am working on a > new version of Gforth, and am in the build directory of Gforth, then > saying "gforth" gives me the development version, not the installed > version. And that was baskk-ackward. If only because it's a whole lot easier to and type the "./" prefix for the exceptional case of wanting something else than the normal instance of a command, than it would be to figure out where the "official" one might be, and type the full path to there every time you want to be sure you get that. The distinction between "gforth" and "./gforth" is way easier to handle than the one between "/opt/swserver/Forth/GForth/V5/patch1/bin/gforth" and "gforth". > That disadvantage was worked around by removing the "." from the front > and putting it on the back of the PATH. That workaround would be half-assed at best, because it relies on the obviously flawed assumption that user will never mis-type commands. But because they do, it's relatively easy for an attacker to pre-load their traps with lots of mis-typed versions of, 'ls', 'cd', etc. One other rather important aspect is that the way Unix does it actually leaves you a _choice_ how you want this handled: _you_ define your $PATH setting, so you can put '.' in there exactly where you want or need it, or not at all. On Microsoft platforms, you have no control over it: the system forces an implied '.' to the front of your PATH, whether you want it or not.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-04-17 20:03 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <mgs6v2$4at$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #20683 |
On 4/17/2015 6:25 PM, Hans-Bernhard Bröker wrote: > Am 17.04.2015 um 16:42 schrieb Anton Ertl: >> Blajrs Jrolrsen <boegre@no.com> writes: >>> On 2015-04-17, rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> Yes, I figured that out. It seems the current working directory is not >>>> considered under Linux for finding executables... really!? > > Yes, really. > >> I think it has something to do with more usage of Unix/Linux by >> non-programmers (to such an extent that they don't even write their >> own shell scripts). > > I don't think that argument works. > > There have been platforms where a very large fraction of users never > wrote a program of their own. The biggest of those has to be Microsoft > Windows, closely followed by MacOS. > > But Unix never was anywhere near the top of that category. I'm not > aware of any system that encouraged users to write their own programs > more strongly than Unix did: the whole "toolkit" paradigm almost forced > _users_ to become programmers, at least at the shell script level. And > how many other systems did come with a bona-fide HLL compiler right > there in the box? > >> In the old times, we had "." first in the PATH. If I am working on a >> new version of Gforth, and am in the build directory of Gforth, then >> saying "gforth" gives me the development version, not the installed >> version. > > And that was baskk-ackward. If only because it's a whole lot easier to > and type the "./" prefix for the exceptional case of wanting something > else than the normal instance of a command, than it would be to figure > out where the "official" one might be, and type the full path to there > every time you want to be sure you get that. > > The distinction between "gforth" and "./gforth" is way easier to handle > than the one between "/opt/swserver/Forth/GForth/V5/patch1/bin/gforth" > and "gforth". > >> That disadvantage was worked around by removing the "." from the front >> and putting it on the back of the PATH. > > That workaround would be half-assed at best, because it relies on the > obviously flawed assumption that user will never mis-type commands. But > because they do, it's relatively easy for an attacker to pre-load their > traps with lots of mis-typed versions of, 'ls', 'cd', etc. > > One other rather important aspect is that the way Unix does it actually > leaves you a _choice_ how you want this handled: _you_ define your $PATH > setting, so you can put '.' in there exactly where you want or need it, > or not at all. On Microsoft platforms, you have no control over it: the > system forces an implied '.' to the front of your PATH, whether you want > it or not. I don't wish to insult anyone. But I will say that I have tried to learn linux several times and found poor support from the linux community. Mostly I think there is an attitude that "we" (the linux community) got it *right*, when there are many, many more PC users, even professional programmers, than there are working under Linux. Ok, everyone is entitled to their opinion. But the problem arises when it is not understood that this is an opinion, not a universal truth. There are good and bad things about both linux and windows. I would like to learn about linux now, so I won't ask "why" anymore. I'll just accept the things that are goofy about it just as I have done with windows for many years. -- Rick
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-04-17 17:14 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <87wq1auwc0.fsf@jester.gateway.pace.com> |
| In reply to | #20685 |
rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> writes: > Mostly I think there is an attitude that "we" (the linux > community) got it *right*, when there are many, many more PC users, > even professional programmers, than there are working under Linux. Linux has its roots in Unix which goes back to the 1970's, long before the existence of PC's, so it tends to use old-school approaches: http://2ndscale.com/rtomayko/2006/that-dilbert-cartoon
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-04-17 20:26 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <mgs8ag$829$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #20686 |
On 4/17/2015 8:14 PM, Paul Rubin wrote: > rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> writes: >> Mostly I think there is an attitude that "we" (the linux >> community) got it *right*, when there are many, many more PC users, >> even professional programmers, than there are working under Linux. > > Linux has its roots in Unix which goes back to the 1970's, long before > the existence of PC's, so it tends to use old-school approaches: > > http://2ndscale.com/rtomayko/2006/that-dilbert-cartoon I'm going to get the better computer, but it costs $35. The rPi 2... This thing is not much of a desktop. I have a 10 year old machine that runs XP and does rings around the rPi. But then it has it's own table, burns enough power to warm a cat very nicely while the rPi serves as a night light and sits on top of my monitor... lol -- Rick
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-04-17 17:32 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <87oammuvhe.fsf@jester.gateway.pace.com> |
| In reply to | #20689 |
rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> writes: > I'm going to get the better computer, but it costs $35. The rPi > 2... This thing is not much of a desktop. I have a 10 year old > machine that runs XP and does rings around the rPi. The Rpi is an embedded linux board that I hope is not being sold as a desktop. The Rpi2 has four cores each around 1.5x the speed of the Rpi1, and I don't know if the parallelism will really help with web browsing. I can understand not wanting to lug a full sized laptop around but there are some very nice, fast ultralights around these days. I want one of these: http://www.dell.com/us/business/p/xps-13-linux/pd.aspx Ironically one of the easiest places to go look at one in person is the Microsoft store. But I'd buy the Linux version above.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-04-17 20:47 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <mgs9ht$b5g$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #20690 |
On 4/17/2015 8:32 PM, Paul Rubin wrote: > rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> writes: >> I'm going to get the better computer, but it costs $35. The rPi >> 2... This thing is not much of a desktop. I have a 10 year old >> machine that runs XP and does rings around the rPi. > > The Rpi is an embedded linux board that I hope is not being sold as a > desktop. The Rpi2 has four cores each around 1.5x the speed of the > Rpi1, and I don't know if the parallelism will really help with web > browsing. I can understand not wanting to lug a full sized laptop > around but there are some very nice, fast ultralights around these days. > I want one of these: > > http://www.dell.com/us/business/p/xps-13-linux/pd.aspx > > Ironically one of the easiest places to go look at one in person is the > Microsoft store. But I'd buy the Linux version above. My problem isn't the size of the laptop exactly. It is the smallness of the space available, lol. I can't use such small machines really. In fact one of my complaints of this 17" laptop is they didn't use all the space available for the keyboard so there is no space between the key sections. It is impossible to feel for any keys like the arrows or the Home, End, PgUp, PgDn keys. You have to look every time you reach for one. Then the rPi is tiny, but the 19" monitor is not and the compact Dell keyboard is wider than the 17" laptop, along with all the tools, drawers, lamps, outlet strips and misc junk on the relatively small table top. If I put the laptop where the keyboard is I have to lay the keyboard behind it... I could bring another table in just for the laptop. Or I could admit I am never going to fire up the XP computer again and use that tray. But for the short term, I'm just looking for a way to talk to the launchpad from the rPi. -- Rick
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-04-18 08:47 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <55321a3f$0$23263$e4fe514c@dreader34.news.xs4all.nl> |
| In reply to | #20690 |
In article <87oammuvhe.fsf@jester.gateway.pace.com>, Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> wrote: >rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> writes: >> I'm going to get the better computer, but it costs $35. The rPi >> 2... This thing is not much of a desktop. I have a 10 year old >> machine that runs XP and does rings around the rPi. > >The Rpi is an embedded linux board that I hope is not being sold as a >desktop. The Rpi2 has four cores each around 1.5x the speed of the >Rpi1, and I don't know if the parallelism will really help with web >browsing. I can understand not wanting to lug a full sized laptop >around but there are some very nice, fast ultralights around these days. >I want one of these: >http://www.dell.com/us/business/p/xps-13-linux/pd.aspx That may be true. But with gforth on the rPi, I demonstrated the following on a fair, couple of years back: - add only a screen and a keyboard - run gforth to compile noforth - install noforth on the launchpad - compile a real time program for metallophones - load it on the launchpad and make it a turnkey - run the turnkey, even detached from the rPi So for old school, who worked on the pdp10's, it is a decent development system. > > >Ironically one of the easiest places to go look at one in person is the >Microsoft store. But I'd buy the Linux version above. I've much more sbc's in store than I can get acquainted with in my lifetime ... Groetjes Albert -- Albert van der Horst, UTRECHT,THE NETHERLANDS Economic growth -- being exponential -- ultimately falters. albert@spe&ar&c.xs4all.nl &=n http://home.hccnet.nl/a.w.m.van.der.horst
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-04-18 11:19 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <mgtsk2$v6j$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #20702 |
On 4/18/2015 4:47 AM, Albert van der Horst wrote: > In article <87oammuvhe.fsf@jester.gateway.pace.com>, > Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> wrote: >> rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> writes: >>> I'm going to get the better computer, but it costs $35. The rPi >>> 2... This thing is not much of a desktop. I have a 10 year old >>> machine that runs XP and does rings around the rPi. >> >> The Rpi is an embedded linux board that I hope is not being sold as a >> desktop. The Rpi2 has four cores each around 1.5x the speed of the >> Rpi1, and I don't know if the parallelism will really help with web >> browsing. I can understand not wanting to lug a full sized laptop >> around but there are some very nice, fast ultralights around these days. >> I want one of these: >> http://www.dell.com/us/business/p/xps-13-linux/pd.aspx > > That may be true. But with gforth on the rPi, I demonstrated the following > on a fair, couple of years back: > - add only a screen and a keyboard > - run gforth to compile noforth > - install noforth on the launchpad > - compile a real time program for metallophones > - load it on the launchpad and make it a turnkey > - run the turnkey, even detached from the rPi > > So for old school, who worked on the pdp10's, it is a > decent development system. > >> >> >> Ironically one of the easiest places to go look at one in person is the >> Microsoft store. But I'd buy the Linux version above. > > I've much more sbc's in store than I can get acquainted with in my > lifetime ... I know what you mean. I have a small stack of MCU boards here I've never applied power to. I bought four of the Cypress boards to help Matthais with Mecrisp only to find the Cypress development system is rather obtuse. They intentionally hide as much as possible from the user... in this case a designer! I had to ask all manner of questions to get something very basic going. But the boards were only $3 or $4 in two slightly different flavors. That's why I bought four, lol. So is noforth documented much? That is one problem I'm having with Mecrisp. It doesn't have a lot of documentation, which is something I would like to work on. Matthias has ported it to several MSP430s and then discovered the ARM CM line. I think there are some dozen ARM targets ready to fire up on eval boards. He really liked the STM line I think. I have an old Motorolla board that should be worth firing up and I think the processor has a version ready for it. Cool. But if noforth would get me to my goal more quickly on this task, I would like to consider it. But it looks like it is only for the MSP430 and not the ARM board I currently have. -- Rick
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 5 of 7 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.arch.embedded
csiph-web