Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.forth > #45118 > unrolled thread

Re: Installing gForth on the Raspberry Pi

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.forth

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: Installing gForth on the Raspberry Pi Steve Graham <solitary.wanderer52@gmail.com> - 2016-01-27 16:33 -0800
    Re: Installing gForth on the Raspberry Pi Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2016-01-28 02:14 +0100
    Re: Installing gForth on the Raspberry Pi Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-01-27 17:16 -0800
    Re: Installing gForth on the Raspberry Pi rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-01-27 21:01 -0500
      Re: Installing gForth on the Raspberry Pi Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-01-27 19:20 -0800
        Re: Installing gForth on the Raspberry Pi rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-01-27 23:02 -0500
          Re: Installing gForth on the Raspberry Pi Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-01-27 22:12 -0800
            Re: Installing gForth on the Raspberry Pi rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-01-28 02:12 -0500
              Re: Installing gForth on the Raspberry Pi Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> - 2016-01-27 23:34 -0800
                Re: Installing gForth on the Raspberry Pi rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-01-28 02:40 -0500
                  Re: Installing gForth on the Raspberry Pi Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> - 2016-01-28 04:24 -0800
              Re: Installing gForth on the Raspberry Pi Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-01-28 00:15 -0800
                Re: Installing gForth on the Raspberry Pi rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-01-28 03:24 -0500
                  Re: Installing gForth on the Raspberry Pi Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-01-28 00:35 -0800
                    Re: Installing gForth on the Raspberry Pi rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-02-05 16:27 -0500
              Re: Installing gForth on the Raspberry Pi Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2016-01-28 00:37 -0800
                Re: Installing gForth on the Raspberry Pi Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> - 2016-01-28 04:13 -0800
                  Re: Installing gForth on the Raspberry Pi Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2016-01-28 04:43 -0800
                  Re: Installing gForth on the Raspberry Pi rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-02-05 16:37 -0500
          Re: Installing gForth on the Raspberry Pi Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> - 2016-01-28 08:12 +0200
    Re: Installing gForth on the Raspberry Pi stephen@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2016-01-28 11:35 +0000
    Re: Installing gForth on the Raspberry Pi Marcos Cruz <use_the_contact_page@programandala.net> - 2016-02-05 21:01 +0000

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#45118 — Re: Installing gForth on the Raspberry Pi

On Sunday, October 26, 2014 at 9:03:07 AM UTC-7, rickman wrote:
> I have an rPi working on my desk and thought I would install gForth on 
> it.  I found suggestions that this command should work...
> 
> sudo apt-get install gforth
> 
> But it didn't...  :(  Here are the error messages.  Any suggestions?  As 
> you can likely tell I am a complete noob with Linux.
> 
> 
> pi@raspberrypi ~ $ sudo apt-get install gforth
> Reading package lists... Done
> Building dependency tree
> Reading state information... Done
> The following extra packages will be installed:
>    gforth-common gforth-lib libffcall1
> The following NEW packages will be installed:
>    gforth gforth-common gforth-lib libffcall1
> 0 upgraded, 4 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded.
> Need to get 979 kB of archives.
> After this operation, 2,703 kB of additional disk space will be used.
> Do you want to continue [Y/n]? y
> Err http://mirrordirector.raspbian.org/raspbian/ wheezy/main gforth-lib 
> armhf 0.7.0+ds1-7
>    404  Not Found
> Err http://mirrordirector.raspbian.org/raspbian/ wheezy/main 
> gforth-common all 0.7.0+ds1-7
>    404  Not Found
> Err http://mirrordirector.raspbian.org/raspbian/ wheezy/main gforth 
> armhf 0.7.0+ds1-7
>    404  Not Found
> Get:1 http://mirrordirector.raspbian.org/raspbian/ wheezy/main 
> libffcall1 armhf 1.10+cvs20100619-2 [12.9 kB]
> Fetched 12.9 kB in 1s (12.6 kB/s)
> Failed to fetch 
> http://mirrordirector.raspbian.org/raspbian/pool/main/g/gforth/gforth-lib_0.7.0+ds1-7_armhf.deb 
>   404  Not Found
> Failed to fetch 
> http://mirrordirector.raspbian.org/raspbian/pool/main/g/gforth/gforth-common_0.7.0+ds1-7_all.deb 
>   404  Not Found
> Failed to fetch 
> http://mirrordirector.raspbian.org/raspbian/pool/main/g/gforth/gforth_0.7.0+ds1-7_armhf.deb 
>   404  Not Found
> E: Unable to fetch some archives, maybe run apt-get update or try with 
> --fix-missing?
> 
> -- 
> 
> Rick

Did you ever get this working?  Just got a RPi.

Steve

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#45119

Steve Graham wrote:
> Did you ever get this working?  Just got a RPi.

I've recently made a Debian repository for Gforth and net2o; it has the 
current snapshot (net2o won't run with the last stable release).

Set it up that way:

cat >/etc/apt/sources.list.d/net2o.list <<EOF
deb http://net2o.de/debian testing main
EOF
wget -O - https://net2o.de/bernd@net2o.de.gpg.asc | apt-key add -

This contains an armhf build, which should run on an RaspPi, and I'm looking 
for RaspPi users to actually test it.

-- 
Bernd Paysan
"If you want it done right, you have to do it yourself"
net2o ID: kQusJzA;7*?t=uy@X}1GWr!+0qqp_Cn176t4(dQ*
http://bernd-paysan.de/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#45120

Steve Graham <solitary.wanderer52@gmail.com> writes:
> Did you ever get this working?  Just got a RPi.

Looks like the Raspian repo was missing gforth.  No idea if it still is.
But there's a working one in the regular Debian repos, and the Gforth
guys here have said it's preferable to build from source because the
Debian maintainers set it up with sub-optimal configuration options.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#45121

On 1/27/2016 7:33 PM, Steve Graham wrote:
> On Sunday, October 26, 2014 at 9:03:07 AM UTC-7, rickman wrote:
>> I have an rPi working on my desk and thought I would install gForth on
>> it.  I found suggestions that this command should work...
>>
>> sudo apt-get install gforth
>>
>> But it didn't...  :(  Here are the error messages.  Any suggestions?  As
>> you can likely tell I am a complete noob with Linux.
>>
>>
>> pi@raspberrypi ~ $ sudo apt-get install gforth
>> Reading package lists... Done
>> Building dependency tree
>> Reading state information... Done
>> The following extra packages will be installed:
>>     gforth-common gforth-lib libffcall1
>> The following NEW packages will be installed:
>>     gforth gforth-common gforth-lib libffcall1
>> 0 upgraded, 4 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded.
>> Need to get 979 kB of archives.
>> After this operation, 2,703 kB of additional disk space will be used.
>> Do you want to continue [Y/n]? y
>> Err http://mirrordirector.raspbian.org/raspbian/ wheezy/main gforth-lib
>> armhf 0.7.0+ds1-7
>>     404  Not Found
>> Err http://mirrordirector.raspbian.org/raspbian/ wheezy/main
>> gforth-common all 0.7.0+ds1-7
>>     404  Not Found
>> Err http://mirrordirector.raspbian.org/raspbian/ wheezy/main gforth
>> armhf 0.7.0+ds1-7
>>     404  Not Found
>> Get:1 http://mirrordirector.raspbian.org/raspbian/ wheezy/main
>> libffcall1 armhf 1.10+cvs20100619-2 [12.9 kB]
>> Fetched 12.9 kB in 1s (12.6 kB/s)
>> Failed to fetch
>> http://mirrordirector.raspbian.org/raspbian/pool/main/g/gforth/gforth-lib_0.7.0+ds1-7_armhf.deb
>>    404  Not Found
>> Failed to fetch
>> http://mirrordirector.raspbian.org/raspbian/pool/main/g/gforth/gforth-common_0.7.0+ds1-7_all.deb
>>    404  Not Found
>> Failed to fetch
>> http://mirrordirector.raspbian.org/raspbian/pool/main/g/gforth/gforth_0.7.0+ds1-7_armhf.deb
>>    404  Not Found
>> E: Unable to fetch some archives, maybe run apt-get update or try with
>> --fix-missing?
>>
>> --
>>
>> Rick
>
> Did you ever get this working?  Just got a RPi.

Yes, I did.  I didn't do much forth with the pi.  I was using it as a 
remote controller for an MCU development project.  It had better support 
for the USB programming interface on the TI Stellaris.

I have a new project now using the Fusion 2 Kickstart kit  ***and*** a 
new rPi 2 which I need to get running.  I still haven't gotten any of 
the rPi zero boards.  I don't want to pay double with the shipping cost 
and Microcenter never seems to have stock.

-- 

Rick

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#45122

rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> writes:
> I still haven't gotten any of the rPi zero boards.  I don't want to
> pay double with the shipping cost and Microcenter never seems to have
> stock.

It's not real clear what to do with a pi0 anyway, other than GPIO
control-type applications that for some reason need a lot of compute or
storage compared to normal embedded MCU's.  Got any good ideas?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#45123

On 1/27/2016 10:20 PM, Paul Rubin wrote:
> rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> writes:
>> I still haven't gotten any of the rPi zero boards.  I don't want to
>> pay double with the shipping cost and Microcenter never seems to have
>> stock.
>
> It's not real clear what to do with a pi0 anyway, other than GPIO
> control-type applications that for some reason need a lot of compute or
> storage compared to normal embedded MCU's.  Got any good ideas?

It's $5.  That alone qualifies it for many projects over other devices. 
  Are you not aware of the other useful aspects of the rPi?  What type 
of projects do you have?

-- 

Rick

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#45124

rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> writes:
> It's $5.  That alone qualifies it for many projects over other
> devices. Are you not aware of the other useful aspects of the rPi?
> What type of projects do you have?

Not all that many, I'm not a hardware guy.  Most hardware things I can
think of need one or more of:

- ethernet and/or wifi
- realtime clock
- very low power (much lower than rpi)
- tiny (wearable) size
- sub-millisecond deterministic timing (not a Linux strong point)
- tons of cpu (makes pi2 much more attractive than pi0)
- analog audio in/out (present on pi-A and pi2)
- camera interface (but I don't like the Pi cameras)
- etc.

Yes you can add most of that stuff to the pi0 but the cost of the
add-ons swamps the cpu board.  A power adapter for a pi0 costs more by
itself than the pi0 does.

I'm sure the Pi0 is good for some things (robotics?) but they are
somewhat niche even for embeded.  Of course the $5 price can't be beat.
So if you've got some cool application ideas, I'd be happy to hear them.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#45126

On 1/28/2016 1:12 AM, Paul Rubin wrote:
> rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> writes:
>> It's $5.  That alone qualifies it for many projects over other
>> devices. Are you not aware of the other useful aspects of the rPi?
>> What type of projects do you have?
>
> Not all that many, I'm not a hardware guy.  Most hardware things I can
> think of need one or more of:
>
> - ethernet and/or wifi
> - realtime clock
> - very low power (much lower than rpi)
> - tiny (wearable) size
> - sub-millisecond deterministic timing (not a Linux strong point)
> - tons of cpu (makes pi2 much more attractive than pi0)
> - analog audio in/out (present on pi-A and pi2)
> - camera interface (but I don't like the Pi cameras)
> - etc.
>
> Yes you can add most of that stuff to the pi0 but the cost of the
> add-ons swamps the cpu board.  A power adapter for a pi0 costs more by
> itself than the pi0 does.
>
> I'm sure the Pi0 is good for some things (robotics?) but they are
> somewhat niche even for embeded.  Of course the $5 price can't be beat.
> So if you've got some cool application ideas, I'd be happy to hear them.

I'm still trying to picture your application that needs "very low power 
(much lower than rpi)" and more processing power than the rPi zero can 
provide.  Actually I'm trying to picture how you could address both 
those needs in the same hardware.

The rPi zero *is* tiny.  If you need smaller you will have a hard time 
getting a high end CPU with Ethernet, etc in this tiny, tiny form factor.

-- 

Rick

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#45127

> I'm still trying to picture your application that needs "very low power 
> (much lower than rpi)" and more processing power than the rPi zero can 
> provide.  Actually I'm trying to picture how you could address both 
> those needs in the same hardware.
> 
> The rPi zero *is* tiny.  If you need smaller you will have a hard time 
> getting a high end CPU with Ethernet, etc in this tiny, tiny form factor.
> 
> -- 
> 
> Rick

rPi 700Mhz, CoreMark=1303 (1.86/MHz)
Atmel SAMV71 (Cortex-M7) 300MHz, CoreMark=1503 (5.01/MHz)
STM32F7xx (Cortex-M7) 200MHz CoreMark=1001 (5.01/MHz)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#45128

On 1/28/2016 2:34 AM, Raimond Dragomir wrote:
>> I'm still trying to picture your application that needs "very low power
>> (much lower than rpi)" and more processing power than the rPi zero can
>> provide.  Actually I'm trying to picture how you could address both
>> those needs in the same hardware.
>>
>> The rPi zero *is* tiny.  If you need smaller you will have a hard time
>> getting a high end CPU with Ethernet, etc in this tiny, tiny form factor.
>>
>> --
>>
>> Rick
>
> rPi 700Mhz, CoreMark=1303 (1.86/MHz)
> Atmel SAMV71 (Cortex-M7) 300MHz, CoreMark=1503 (5.01/MHz)
> STM32F7xx (Cortex-M7) 200MHz CoreMark=1001 (5.01/MHz)

The rPi 2 is a quad core, faster than 700 MHz.  These other devices are 
not boards.

-- 

Rick

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#45143

joi, 28 ianuarie 2016, 09:40:19 UTC+2, rickman a scris:
> On 1/28/2016 2:34 AM, Raimond Dragomir wrote:
> >> I'm still trying to picture your application that needs "very low power
> >> (much lower than rpi)" and more processing power than the rPi zero can
> >> provide.  Actually I'm trying to picture how you could address both
> >> those needs in the same hardware.
> >>
> >> The rPi zero *is* tiny.  If you need smaller you will have a hard time
> >> getting a high end CPU with Ethernet, etc in this tiny, tiny form factor.
> >>
> >> --
> >>
> >> Rick
> >
> > rPi 700Mhz, CoreMark=1303 (1.86/MHz)
> > Atmel SAMV71 (Cortex-M7) 300MHz, CoreMark=1503 (5.01/MHz)
> > STM32F7xx (Cortex-M7) 200MHz CoreMark=1001 (5.01/MHz)
> 
> The rPi 2 is a quad core, faster than 700 MHz.  These other devices are 
> not boards.
> 
> -- 
> 
> Rick

Yup, but rpi0 is the old core.
You can make a little board with one of the other devices, something like
rpi0 easily. You cannot easily make your own custom board with a broadcom 
cpu.
The price is not everything.
In industrial fields, rpi is hardly usable.
Even in consumer products there are cases when it's not suitable: I have
a project of a consumer product that can be done with a rpi0. Only that
it works on batteries. With rpi it will last 10 hours full working, with
a microcontroller will last 100+. I think standby time is even better although
I don't know enough about standby power of an rpi/linux thing.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#45129

rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> writes:
> I'm still trying to picture your application that needs "very low
> power (much lower than rpi)" and more processing power than the rPi
> zero can provide.  Actually I'm trying to picture how you could
> address both those needs in the same hardware.

No, not both at the same time.  "One or more of [feature list]" doesn't
mean "all at the same time".  I can think of various cpu-hungry apps and
various low-power/wearable apps.  It would be great to be able to have
both at the same time (GA144?) but that's much more difficult.

> The rPi zero *is* tiny.  If you need smaller you will have a hard time
> getting a high end CPU with Ethernet, etc in this tiny, tiny form
> factor.

By tiny I mean something like this:

  https://www.tiny-circuits.com/tiny-lily-mini-processor.html 

It doesn't have ethernet or a high end cpu, but it's small and low
power.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#45130

On 1/28/2016 3:15 AM, Paul Rubin wrote:
> rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> writes:
>> I'm still trying to picture your application that needs "very low
>> power (much lower than rpi)" and more processing power than the rPi
>> zero can provide.  Actually I'm trying to picture how you could
>> address both those needs in the same hardware.
>
> No, not both at the same time.  "One or more of [feature list]" doesn't
> mean "all at the same time".  I can think of various cpu-hungry apps and
> various low-power/wearable apps.  It would be great to be able to have
> both at the same time (GA144?) but that's much more difficult.
>
>> The rPi zero *is* tiny.  If you need smaller you will have a hard time
>> getting a high end CPU with Ethernet, etc in this tiny, tiny form
>> factor.
>
> By tiny I mean something like this:
>
>    https://www.tiny-circuits.com/tiny-lily-mini-processor.html
>
> It doesn't have ethernet or a high end cpu, but it's small and low
> power.

Yes, there are many, many different MCUs with a wide variety of 
capabilities.  None have all capabilities.  No processor will do 
everything.

-- 

Rick

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#45132

rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> writes:
> Yes, there are many, many different MCUs with a wide variety of
> capabilities.  None have all capabilities.  No processor will do
> everything.

Right, I was involved with something a few years ago that used a
Glomation ARM board with ethernet, and an Rpi2 (not available then),
Odroid, Beaglebone etc. would have been great for that as well.  At the
other end there are those tiny MCU things, also useful.  In between is
the Pi0 and I still haven't figured out a good use for one.  The GA144
was sort of similar, only more so.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#45320

On 1/28/2016 3:35 AM, Paul Rubin wrote:
> rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> writes:
>> Yes, there are many, many different MCUs with a wide variety of
>> capabilities.  None have all capabilities.  No processor will do
>> everything.
>
> Right, I was involved with something a few years ago that used a
> Glomation ARM board with ethernet, and an Rpi2 (not available then),
> Odroid, Beaglebone etc. would have been great for that as well.  At the
> other end there are those tiny MCU things, also useful.  In between is
> the Pi0 and I still haven't figured out a good use for one.  The GA144
> was sort of similar, only more so.

No comparison whatsoever!!!  The GA144 could have a few useful apps if 
some tools were available for it.  The stuff available for the GA144 is 
a bit like handing someone a bucket and shovel at the beach when they 
want a semiconductor chip.

The rPi zero is a perfectly usable board for a variety of projects.  If 
you prefer something programmed at a lower level, that's fine.  Many 
like to program with the full support of an OS on the target.

-- 

Rick

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#45133

On Thursday, 28 January 2016 07:12:07 UTC, rickman  wrote:
> On 1/28/2016 1:12 AM, Paul Rubin wrote:
> > rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> writes:
> >> It's $5.  That alone qualifies it for many projects over other
> >> devices. Are you not aware of the other useful aspects of the rPi?
> >> What type of projects do you have?
> >
> > Not all that many, I'm not a hardware guy.  Most hardware things I can
> > think of need one or more of:
> >
> > - ethernet and/or wifi
> > - realtime clock
> > - very low power (much lower than rpi)
> > - tiny (wearable) size
> > - sub-millisecond deterministic timing (not a Linux strong point)
> > - tons of cpu (makes pi2 much more attractive than pi0)
> > - analog audio in/out (present on pi-A and pi2)
> > - camera interface (but I don't like the Pi cameras)
> > - etc.
> >
> > Yes you can add most of that stuff to the pi0 but the cost of the
> > add-ons swamps the cpu board.  A power adapter for a pi0 costs more by
> > itself than the pi0 does.
> >
> > I'm sure the Pi0 is good for some things (robotics?) but they are
> > somewhat niche even for embeded.  Of course the $5 price can't be beat.
> > So if you've got some cool application ideas, I'd be happy to hear them.
> 
> I'm still trying to picture your application that needs "very low power 
> (much lower than rpi)" and more processing power than the rPi zero can 
> provide.  Actually I'm trying to picture how you could address both 
> those needs in the same hardware.
> 
> The rPi zero *is* tiny.  If you need smaller you will have a hard time 
> getting a high end CPU with Ethernet, etc in this tiny, tiny form factor.
> 
> -- 
> 
> Rick

Agreed. We've pretty much reached the point where it's not worth
designing custom hardware for a project, unless there's a pressing
design constraint such as very low power or something like that.
I can buy a rPi0 for less than it would cost to get a prototype 
run of PCB boards. It's just not worth it.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#45141

> Agreed. We've pretty much reached the point where it's not worth
> designing custom hardware for a project, unless there's a pressing
> design constraint such as very low power or something like that.
> I can buy a rPi0 for less than it would cost to get a prototype 
> run of PCB boards. It's just not worth it.

Being a hardware engineer for 20 years, working in industrial fields mainly,
I cannot agree with this.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#45146

On Thursday, 28 January 2016 12:13:24 UTC, Raimond Dragomir  wrote:
> > Agreed. We've pretty much reached the point where it's not worth
> > designing custom hardware for a project, unless there's a pressing
> > design constraint such as very low power or something like that.
> > I can buy a rPi0 for less than it would cost to get a prototype 
> > run of PCB boards. It's just not worth it.
> 
> Being a hardware engineer for 20 years, working in industrial fields mainly,
> I cannot agree with this.

In industrial areas, I'd tend to agree with you. I have a particular
interest in functional safety systems, and I see Forth as being ideal
for functional safety, as it's relatively simple to validate a Forth
application, since there's very little underneath it. So, for an 
industrial application such as an ESD system on a pipeline, purpose
designed hardware running Forth is perfect. For this, a PI would not
be the first choice: there's a huge OS and proprietary libraries 
which cannot be validated (the only defence would be 'proven in use').

However, most industrial systems have a communications interface
that allows the unit(s) to communicate with a SCADA system or something
similar. In days gone by, these were serial systems and were relatively
simple. These days, they tend to be TCP/IP based, and may be internet
facing. A rPI would be the ideal device to sit between the SCADA system
and the device running the SIF (Safeety Instrumented Function). The
hardware/software running on the PI would not need to be validated,
since it could fail and the safety system would carry on doing its
job. So, yes, I could (and do) see a use for custom hardware for situations
such as the above, but I would use cheap units such as a PI where
I could.

Another constraint might be environmental: Some installations I've worked
on have requirements to work over very wide temperature ranges (in
Kazakhstan our kit had to work at -40 and +40 degrees C) and a PI, which
is a domestic unit, might not be suitable. Would have to put one in
a freezer for a week and see!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#45321

On 1/28/2016 7:13 AM, Raimond Dragomir wrote:
>> Agreed. We've pretty much reached the point where it's not worth
>> designing custom hardware for a project, unless there's a pressing
>> design constraint such as very low power or something like that.
>> I can buy a rPi0 for less than it would cost to get a prototype
>> run of PCB boards. It's just not worth it.
>
> Being a hardware engineer for 20 years, working in industrial fields mainly,
> I cannot agree with this.

Depends entirely on your project.  I was discussing with a customer an 
application for a generic user control box which would contain an SBC a 
few push buttons and a graphic display.  I can see no reason to design a 
PCB for that.  I would use an industrial temperature BBB which is fully 
qualified for the requirements.

If your requirements do not include wider temperatures, the rPi zero 
would do just fine.

-- 

Rick

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#45125

On 28/01/2016 06:02, rickman wrote:

> It's $5.  That alone qualifies it for many projects over other devices.
>  Are you not aware of the other useful aspects of the rPi?  What type of
> projects do you have?

8th runs on the RPI, if that's of interest

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.forth

csiph-web