 | | new EmuLegOS release 1.2.5.0
|
|
I just posted a new release of EmuLegOS, if you're interested you can grab it from (URL) of the changes were just adding support for additional sensor types. Here is the changelog. 1.2.5.0 03/02/02 Mark Falco - added include for semaphore.h so user (...) (23 years ago, 2-Mar-02, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: reliability of quad speed LNP
|
|
(...) Probably depends on the make-up of the data you're transferring. ROSCO (23 years ago, 28-Feb-02, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: reliability of quad speed LNP
|
|
So with inverting every other message byte were you able to work at 4x? Were you then also able to work at close range at 4x? It would seem easy to patch LNP to automatically do this inversion. I'll have to give this a try. thanks, mark (23 years ago, 28-Feb-02, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: RFC: Creation of Version 0.2.6
|
|
(...) We asked our lawyers about this many months ago, when the whole issue first came up. It's okay with them if the name "legOS" is used in a "formerly known as" context. Just like what you describe, basically - to make sure people understand that (...) (23 years ago, 27-Feb-02, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: reliability of quad speed LNP
|
|
"Mark Falco" <falcom@onebox.com> wrote in message news:Gs44C0.MGL@lugnet.com... (...) <<snip>> I'm not familiar with LNP but I have also experienced similar messaging problems. I have an old RCX 1.0 (S/N 22751) with serial tower and a newer RCX 2.0 (...) (23 years ago, 27-Feb-02, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
