Back
[08:51:39] <KGB-linuxcnc> 03John Thornton 052.7 726fae9 06linuxcnc 10(8 files in 2 dirs) Docs: add expand/contract and combine pdfs for spanish docs * 14http://git.linuxcnc.org/?p=linuxcnc.git;a=commitdiff;h=726fae9
[09:26:22] <kwallace> seb_kuzminsky,
http://linuxcnc.mah.priv.at/irc/%23linuxcnc-devel/2015-07-02.html#03:22:45 My LinuxCNC is 2.8.0~pre1
[09:41:26] <kwallace> One problem, I consulted the documentation for 2.6, which is the current default from
http://linuxcnc.org/index.php/english/documentation . What is considered the current stable rev?
[09:46:04] <skunkworks> 2.6.8
[10:05:46] <linuxcnc-build> build #2618 of 4007.deb-precise-i386 is complete: Failure [4failed shell_3] Build details are at
http://buildbot.linuxcnc.org/buildbot/builders/4007.deb-precise-i386/builds/2618 blamelist: John Thornton <bjt128@gmail.com>
[10:05:59] <linuxcnc-build> build #2618 of 4008.deb-precise-amd64 is complete: Failure [4failed shell_3] Build details are at
http://buildbot.linuxcnc.org/buildbot/builders/4008.deb-precise-amd64/builds/2618 blamelist: John Thornton <bjt128@gmail.com>
[10:07:13] <linuxcnc-build> build #2615 of 4003.deb-lucid-i386 is complete: Failure [4failed shell_3] Build details are at
http://buildbot.linuxcnc.org/buildbot/builders/4003.deb-lucid-i386/builds/2615 blamelist: John Thornton <bjt128@gmail.com>
[10:12:39] <seb_kuzminsky> kwallace: you have both a git checkout and an installed debian package, right?
[10:13:25] <linuxcnc-build> build #1446 of 4009.deb-precise-rtai-i386 is complete: Failure [4failed shell_3] Build details are at
http://buildbot.linuxcnc.org/buildbot/builders/4009.deb-precise-rtai-i386/builds/1446 blamelist: John Thornton <bjt128@gmail.com>
[10:21:56] <linuxcnc-build> build #627 of 4015.deb-wheezy-rtpreempt-amd64 is complete: Failure [4failed shell_3] Build details are at
http://buildbot.linuxcnc.org/buildbot/builders/4015.deb-wheezy-rtpreempt-amd64/builds/627 blamelist: John Thornton <bjt128@gmail.com>
[10:23:26] <jepler> JT-Shop_: do you know how to fix that build error?
[10:23:49] <linuxcnc-build> build #588 of 4014.deb-wheezy-rtpreempt-i386 is complete: Failure [4failed shell_3] Build details are at
http://buildbot.linuxcnc.org/buildbot/builders/4014.deb-wheezy-rtpreempt-i386/builds/588 blamelist: John Thornton <bjt128@gmail.com>
[10:26:26] <linuxcnc-build> build #2609 of 4006.deb-lucid-rtai-i386 is complete: Failure [4failed shell_3] Build details are at
http://buildbot.linuxcnc.org/buildbot/builders/4006.deb-lucid-rtai-i386/builds/2609 blamelist: John Thornton <bjt128@gmail.com>
[10:27:03] <linuxcnc-build> build #2614 of 4004.deb-lucid-amd64 is complete: Failure [4failed shell_3] Build details are at
http://buildbot.linuxcnc.org/buildbot/builders/4004.deb-lucid-amd64/builds/2614 blamelist: John Thornton <bjt128@gmail.com>
[10:30:21] <linuxcnc-build> build #1185 of 4017.deb-wheezy-amd64 is complete: Failure [4failed shell_3] Build details are at
http://buildbot.linuxcnc.org/buildbot/builders/4017.deb-wheezy-amd64/builds/1185 blamelist: John Thornton <bjt128@gmail.com>
[10:31:48] <linuxcnc-build> build #1184 of 4016.deb-wheezy-i386 is complete: Failure [4failed shell_3] Build details are at
http://buildbot.linuxcnc.org/buildbot/builders/4016.deb-wheezy-i386/builds/1184 blamelist: John Thornton <bjt128@gmail.com>
[10:34:15] <linuxcnc-build> build #878 of 4018.deb-wheezy-rtai-i386 is complete: Failure [4failed shell_3] Build details are at
http://buildbot.linuxcnc.org/buildbot/builders/4018.deb-wheezy-rtai-i386/builds/878 blamelist: John Thornton <bjt128@gmail.com>
[11:18:29] <kwallace> seb_kuzminsky, yes I have the tormach git package installed, then did a linuxcnc git install. Halcompile didn't work so I went to my old habit and used Synaptic to install linuxcnc-dev, which installed comp. I then searched for halcompile and found it, copied it to /usr/bin and it seems to work. I was so used to just doing the linuxcnc-dev install and having it just work, that it took me off guard a little.
[11:27:13] <JT-Shop_> jepler, yes I will fix that
[11:30:38] <jepler> thanks!
[11:32:34] <seb_kuzminsky> kwallace: what version of linuxcnc-dev did you install? if it was 2.6 or older you'll get comp instead of halcompile
[11:52:08] <kwallace> seb_kuzminsky, I think the problem is that Synaptic didn't see my linuxcnc 2.8 install. I just chose the linuxcnc-dev that was on the list, which I suppose was for 2.6. I assumed Synaptic would pick up the proper LinuxCNC version -- silly me. I got my component installed so I'm happy. Thanks for your help.
[14:31:16] <KGB-linuxcnc> 03John Thornton 052.7 029339f 06linuxcnc 10debian/linuxcnc-doc-es.files.in Docs: fix file list for spanish docs * 14http://git.linuxcnc.org/?p=linuxcnc.git;a=commitdiff;h=029339f
[14:53:40] <linuxcnc-build> build #1584 of 1404.rip-wheezy-rtpreempt-amd64 is complete: Failure [4failed runtests] Build details are at
http://buildbot.linuxcnc.org/buildbot/builders/1404.rip-wheezy-rtpreempt-amd64/builds/1584 blamelist: John Thornton <bjt128@gmail.com>
[14:56:42] <seb_kuzminsky> hmm
[15:09:51] <linuxcnc-build> build #3243 of 0000.checkin is complete: Failure [4failed] Build details are at
http://buildbot.linuxcnc.org/buildbot/builders/0000.checkin/builds/3243 blamelist: John Thornton <bjt128@gmail.com>
[16:01:48] <mozmck> seb_kuzminsky: I have a small change to gremlin adding another mouse button mode. It should not affect anything existing - can I push to 2.7?
[16:09:25] <seb_kuzminsky> what does the new mode do?
[16:15:07] <jepler> can you place the patch somewhere for review?
[16:23:15] <mozmck> sure
[16:23:47] <mozmck> http://pastie.org/10270597
[16:24:13] <mozmck> Oops, that got chopped off
[16:25:39] <mozmck> http://pastie.org/10270601
[16:26:34] <mozmck> It just adds a mode with no rotate, for plasma machines :)
[16:27:00] <seb_kuzminsky> thanks for breaking that line inot several
[16:27:22] <mozmck> heh! was a pain to read.
[16:28:07] <seb_kuzminsky> looks fine to me
[16:29:12] <mozmck> Ok, does jepler have any comments on it?
[16:30:13] <seb_kuzminsky> he knows gremlin much better than i do
[16:30:23] <cradek> are you sure that split gives the same results?
[16:30:36] <mozmck> I have to run for now. If there are no objections I'll push it late tonight or tomorrow.
[16:30:38] <cradek> you lost some backslash-space, whatever that is
[16:30:53] <mozmck> cradek: no, it has a new line ;)
[16:31:43] <mozmck> I think the original had a slash in front of each line, I could look at that again.
[16:32:05] <mozmck> It only affects the tooltip in glade as far as I know.
[16:32:50] <cradek> >>> 'a\n\ bc'
[16:32:50] <cradek> 'a\n\\ bc'
[16:32:50] <cradek> >>> ('a\n' 'bc')
[16:32:50] <cradek> 'a\nbc'
[16:33:40] <cradek> I'm pretty sure you changed it, but I don't know what that change does
[16:34:15] <mozmck> Just checked and it has a \ in front of each line in the tooltip
[16:34:25] <mozmck> That looked odd to me so I removed it.
[16:34:26] <jepler> >>> ' ' == '\ '
[16:34:26] <jepler> False
[16:34:26] <jepler> >>> '\ '
[16:34:26] <jepler> '\\ '
[16:35:00] <cradek> oh ok, so that part is a bugfix
[16:35:16] <jepler> it looks like a backslash-newline sequence in a string was turned into a backslash-space sequence
[16:35:28] <mozmck> It actually inserts the \ in the tooltip, so the lines look like this '\ 0 = default: l-rotate, m-move, r-zoom'
[16:35:29] <jepler> backslash-newline is a special sequence which is converted to exactly nothing
[16:35:45] <jepler> but I didn't look at the history of that file
[16:36:13] <mozmck> I don't know. It had \n\
[16:36:34] <mozmck> My thought was the \ at the end was an attempt to break the line up.
[16:36:36] <jepler> mozmck: two pieces of feedback, feel free to ignore. (1) it would be better to make a separate commit to fix the formatting of that long string and remove the spurious backslashes .. and then a second commit to add the new mode
[16:37:02] <jepler> (2) if you make the last branch of that if statement 'elif self.mouse_btn_mode == 5:
[16:37:16] <jepler> er ... == 6: then the next person doesn't need to change the else: to that elif:
[16:37:41] <jepler> other than that, the patch looks minimally disruptive for 2.7.
[16:38:05] <mozmck> I did it that way at first, but that left no default, which probably doesn't matter because the property is limited to 6
[16:38:37] <mozmck> So I'll change it back
[16:38:56] <mozmck> Ok, thanks! I really have to run now.
[20:01:30] <Tom_itx> PCW, which chips do you think were affected by the surge on this 7i47s?
[20:01:38] <Tom_itx> you mentioned the 74ACT04 and i noticed U4 ISL32274 is getting hot however U9 doesn't seem to be getting hot but it's probably bad
[20:02:03] <Tom_itx> makes the 7805 i'm testing with get nice n toasty
[20:02:33] <Tom_itx> those look pretty easy to replace
[20:02:41] <Tom_itx> i think the 3.3v reg is ok
[21:00:19] <PCW> Yes the ACT04 and the ISL32274s are all the runs from 5V so probably all that was damaged
[21:01:02] <Tom_itx> gettin ready to pop em off the board..
[21:06:57] <Tom_itx> drawing 260mA
[21:10:51] <PCW> with bad parts? that's high if everything is good
[21:11:19] <Tom_itx> yeah, bad parts
[21:11:29] <Tom_itx> wanted to check before hand
[21:11:50] <Tom_itx> probably should be around 20-30 when good?
[21:11:56] <PCW> should be no more than 30 or so
[21:12:01] <Tom_itx> if that
[21:12:11] <PCW> (no load on outputs)
[21:12:15] <Tom_itx> rihgt
[21:12:19] <Tom_itx> bare board
[21:12:23] <PCW> all CMOS
[21:12:53] <PCW> though line receivers are analog so not 0 power
[21:13:22] <Tom_itx> i didn't check the analog for the spindle
[21:13:37] <Tom_itx> it should be separate supply anyway right?
[21:15:11] <PCW> yes its isolated so unless you had the 5V connected across the analog POT + an - the analog section should be OK
[21:16:06] <Tom_itx> nope, it was on a separate 10v reg
[21:16:14] <PCW> (you may have overloaded the OPTO LEDs somewhat but thats not too likely to hurt anything)
[21:19:42] <Tom_itx> the 4pin blocks by the 50 pin header? 3 white one black...
[21:20:38] <PCW> Yes (TLP127s I think)
[21:21:18] <Tom_itx> P127 on the white ones
[21:24:16] <PCW> actually even at 23 V the OPTO LEDs are not overloaded
[21:25:28] <PCW> 23V -~1V diode drop and 470 resistor = 46 MA (TLP127 max continuous is 50 mA)
[21:25:48] <Tom_itx> the display didn't go above 23v but the raw supply was 24
[21:31:18] <Tom_itx> 60mA with the one that was getting hot removed
[21:46:55] <Tom_itx> 46 with both ICL chips removed
[22:16:09] <Tom_itx> 11.7mA with all 3 removed