 | | Re: RCX as a PGP engine
|
|
I posted this msg. about 10 days ago but as my server was set up wrong it didn't work. sorry for the delay. At the time of posting this i have already seen the movie thrice so I'm about ready. I've recently (a month ago) created a RSA (...) (23 years ago, 27-Mar-02, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: RFC: smaller task scheduler
|
|
In lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos, Joseph Woolley writes: <snip> (...) <snip> Ok, so I was wrong about this. I double checked the standard task scheduler, and sure enough, it cycles through the high priority tasks, until all are P_WAITING, then moves (...) (23 years ago, 27-Mar-02, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: Final RFC on next legOS release (would have been legOS 0.2.6)
|
|
Concerning the name change, call for ideas and a vote, I would suggest that a NEW thread entitled similar to "Call for legOS name change" be created in lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos. The details when worked out and as outlined in the rlswork doc should (...) (23 years ago, 26-Mar-02, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: RFC: smaller task scheduler
|
|
"Stephen M Moraco" <stephen_moraco@agilent.com> wrote in message news:GtKIM4.Gws@lugnet.com... (...) <snip> (...) Sounds good. Now, who would like to provide a second opinion? BTW, as far as intended purpose of the task scheduler... I can see how (...) (23 years ago, 26-Mar-02, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: Deleting Programs
|
|
That would be great. Thanks Mark! Obviously, it will be prudent to make some or all of these optional at compile time... but I believe at least half of them are useful for most users. Anyone have an idea of priority on this addition? Should it be (...) (23 years ago, 26-Mar-02, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: RFC: smaller task scheduler
|
|
In lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos, Joseph Woolley writes: <snip> (...) This is exciting... <snip> (...) Good work on this! Since you have the config and simple swap we'll need to prove that both versions are still working and I'd like a 2nd opinion (...) (23 years ago, 26-Mar-02, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposals, Bug Fixes, etc and tracking them with SourceForge
|
|
(...) Sounds good to me, I'll fix them up and put them in as patches. As far as keeping things small they will be able to be excluded at compile time, much like everything else in LegOS. It is probably also a good idea to have all 3rd party sensors (...) (23 years ago, 26-Mar-02, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: Deleting Programs
|
|
(...) I created a user space program which does some of this. I call it "inspector" as it mostly inspects the values of sensors. It also shows the current battery reading and how long the RCX has been on. The UI is pretty simple to use. It also (...) (23 years ago, 25-Mar-02, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: Final RFC on next legOS release (would have been legOS 0.2.6)
|
|
(...) Since there has to be a name change, perhaps keep the numbering for continuity? Unless you think we should go direct to 0.3.0 :-) Max. (23 years ago, 25-Mar-02, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: Deleting Programs
|
|
And another option would be: 3.5) View/Set RCX ID for lnp. <snip> (...) <snip> - Joe (23 years ago, 25-Mar-02, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
