 | | Re: ttyS1 corrupted after using legos
|
|
(...) Is the only program you are using to download things firmdl3? (...) Try also stty -a < /dev/ttyS0 and/or stty -a < /dev/ttyS1. (...) As far as I know, firmdl3 does not download .lx files. I think there is a separate program for that. dll (...) (24 years ago, 2-Nov-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | ttyS1 corrupted after using legos
|
|
Hi there, I donwloaded, compiled and used legOS 2.4 which worked all very fine. But since then, I cannot use the serial port anymore that I connected the IR-tower to. Maybe anyone has encountered the same problem and knows a solution:) I am no (...) (24 years ago, 2-Nov-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | LNP and the LEGO remote
|
|
Luis previously wrote: > I'd actually really like to include Chris's patch in the official tree, > but I'm informed by folks with more clue about the networking stuff than > me that switching the parity bit would probably break some LNP stuff. I (...) (24 years ago, 1-Nov-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: text location for apps and q?
|
|
Hello, (...) No they don't have a separate address space. I think the limit is 19456 bytes for the kernel, and this is caused by a limitation of the ROM, which is used to download the firmware (kernel). It loads it to the address range 8000-cc00. (...) (24 years ago, 30-Oct-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | new legOS documentation
|
|
Thanks to the efforts of a number of people, there is a raft of new documents up at the legOS site. Because of the growing amount of documentation, I've organized a new page to keep track of all the available docs: (URL) things up there now: *LegOS (...) (24 years ago, 29-Oct-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos, lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: LNP + Java
|
|
Ciaran- To the best of my knowledge, no one has written such an interface. If you want to tackle it yourself, I'd suggest looking at pyLNP (URL) and the two Java interfaces that my lego + linux howto will soon list: (URL) imagine that with the (...) (24 years ago, 29-Oct-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | LNP + Java
|
|
Simple question, has anyone out there written, or begun writing an LNP interface object for java ? I'd like the development environment I'm writing to keep control of my little Genetic Program RCX to be less platform specific than linux or windows, (...) (24 years ago, 29-Oct-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: 0.2.4 API (Long)
|
|
I'll look at this and probably post it tomorrow (very, very long day, which you'd think would be surprising on a Saturday :| On first glance, it looks like a very useful document. Unfortunately, the autogenerated API docs have become more and more (...) (24 years ago, 29-Oct-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | 0.2.4 API (Long)
|
|
I put together a .html document that sums up the User Level functions (as opposed to the internal/Kernel housekeeping functions), Constants, and Macros. I forwarded it to Luis, maybe he'll put it up later on LegOS.Sourforge.net In the meantime, I (...) (24 years ago, 28-Oct-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: text location for apps and q?
|
|
(...) Ok, but why? Again, if you're just having fun, go for it, but don't expect it to be useful. Personally, the current interface is simple and highly functional, and a change to a file paradigm would just make it more complicated with no benefit. (...) (24 years ago, 27-Oct-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: text location for apps and q?
|
|
(...) But also for luis, it's not just about performance, it's about interface. of course there's always hack value, but it also might be useful. like many people would expect printf() or write() to stdout instead of cputs(). i don't think there's a (...) (24 years ago, 27-Oct-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: text location for apps and q?
|
|
(...) for the output device thing, the lcd isn't the only device. sensors and motors are also can be implemented as files. (...) well it's still just an idea, maybe the fork() will turn out as rfork(). doesn't really matter now. but see my other (...) (24 years ago, 27-Oct-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: text location for apps and q?
|
|
Yeah. I have to agree with Ross. Increased unix-ness would be nice, but additional complexity with no actual performance gain most definitely is not. That said, like the remote patch that I'll post sometime this weekend, I'll take patches for (...) (24 years ago, 26-Oct-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: text location for apps and q?
|
|
(...) Well, as someone else has said in this thread, if you're doing it for fun, or to learn more about memory management / file systems, etc, then got for it. But I wouldn't expect much of it to be included in the official versions - you've got to (...) (24 years ago, 26-Oct-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: text location for apps and q?
|
|
(...) You can't implement a true fork() anyway, since you don't have memory management and therefore can't copy the address space of the parent process. John A. Tamplin LiveOnTheNet.COM, Inc. jat@LiveOnTheNet.COM 2104 West Ferry Way 256/705-7007 - (...) (24 years ago, 26-Oct-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: text location for apps and q?
|
|
(...) I just have to ask why you're doing this, just for the heck of it? I mean, the output device you're writing two can hold a whopping five characters at a time. I don't really see the benefit of changing to a more complicated interface. Of (...) (24 years ago, 26-Oct-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: text location for apps and q?
|
|
(...) when i remove -O from my Makefile the kernel grew bigger, and crossed 0xb000, so i changed it accordingly, and that didn't work. so i guess there is 16k limitation for kernel and user program. (...) too bad, but there's not much to work on (...) (24 years ago, 26-Oct-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: text location for apps and q?
|
|
(...) hehehe... (...) my (...) it's from www.nogs.de/legos i think. but it doesn't really matter since i've compiled 2.95.2 and the new binutils. imel (24 years ago, 26-Oct-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: SubSumption and Dave Baum
|
|
Sorry about that, Jonathan. I didn't think that there was any legOS code in Dave's book, but I didn't want to argue with someone who had read it more recently or more thoroughly than I had (which, honestly, wasn't very much, since I don't do NQC.) (...) (24 years ago, 24-Oct-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: SubSumption and Dave Baum
|
|
For the record: _The Unofficial Guide to Lego Mindstorms Robots_ was written by me, Jonathan Knudsen. I'm pretty sure this is the book you're using, since it has the Hank robot in it. As you've observed, the legOS code is for version 0.1.7, and the (...) (24 years ago, 24-Oct-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
