Back
[09:55:49] <jepler> > Your message has been successfully posted. It will be reviewed by a moderator before it will be published on the forum.
[09:56:13] <jepler> OK, that satisfies my curiosity as to whether a new forum user is warned in any way that their post won't appear immediately.
[09:57:00] <jepler> .. it's not in big, flashing letters but it is there
[10:12:19] <mozmck> I blocked one user this morning. Looked like their first post was spam, but I did not see anything about it needing moderating?
[10:12:34] <mozmck> approval
[10:12:47] <jepler> I did get an e-mail about the post from latestcracksoftware
[10:13:48] <jepler> if you didn't get an e-mail about it, how did you know to do something?
[10:14:37] <jepler> .. unfortunately I'm not aware of a place to look to see all posts awaiting moderation :-/
[10:16:02] <mozmck> I get an email for every post to the forum, and that one was obviously spam.
[10:16:22] <mozmck> I don't get moderation emails - I think because I'm also an admin?
[10:17:28] <mozmck> Yes, kunena seems to be missing some control panel features that are in phpbb, but it has some features that are nicer.
[10:22:10] <mozmck> ooh! a monodevelop gui! next we need a vm with win 10 running a gui written in java! ;-)
[10:23:37] <jepler> I'm staying out of that one
[10:24:42] <mozmck> heh! I don't really care, but I'm not too interested in C# - or Java
[10:26:30] <jepler> mozmck: if you're logged in, do you now get a "moderation" button/link just under the linuxcnc logo?
[10:27:21] <mozmck> Oh, yes I do.
[10:27:33] <jepler> yay
[10:27:43] <mozmck> If I click it, I see 2 posts needing approval.
[10:27:51] <jepler> that is the same as I see
[10:28:03] <mozmck> good. looks like spam to me ;-)
[10:29:16] <jepler> you're welcome to delete those two posts if you want
[10:29:40] <jepler> afk
[10:32:13] <mozmck> I was just teasing - but I'll delete them if you want me to.
[10:39:10] <JT-Shop> when your viewing the main forum page any sections that have messages waiting on moderation will have "n pending message(s) below the description
[10:51:37] <jepler> JT-Shop: I did not know that
[10:52:13] <jepler> but now that I looked, I see it
[10:53:36] <JT-Shop> sometimes fun to find if their first post is a reply to a message
[11:08:47] <Roguish> pcw_home or PCW around ???
[11:10:36] <pcw_home> might be
[11:45:23] <skunkworks> zlog,
[20:48:31] <cradek> jepler: I set out to fix gh30 (g53 when rotated). fixing precisely gh30 is easy because in steps 3 and 4 you specify both X and Y. but in general, when rotated and doing g53 with only one of x or y specified, I don't know what the behavior should be.
[20:50:07] <jepler> My intuition is that if you only specify G53X then only machine X should move, Y shouldn't
[20:50:54] <cradek> so you'll end up with both X and Y coordinates changing in your rotated system
[20:51:28] <cradek> that is one of the two designs that feel right
[20:51:38] <jepler> yes
[20:52:26] <jepler> I imagine that G53 is like a sequence that suspends G92, switches to a modal coordinate system with no offsets or rotation, does the motion, and then puts everything back
[20:52:58] <cradek> (and tool offset) yeah, I think that feels right
[20:53:32] <jepler> is G53 forbidden in cutter comp?
[20:53:46] <cradek> so in AXIS with the system rotated, you expect g0 g53 x__ to make a horizontal move on the screen
[20:53:57] <jepler> yeah
[20:54:27] <jepler> .. you said it's one of two designs that feels right. do you think the design which makes only the X on the DRO change also feels right? or is there some other option I didn't consider?
[20:55:26] <cradek> yes it is forbidden in cutter comp
[20:55:38] <cradek> yes that is the other one I considered
[20:55:56] <cradek> because in general, if you don't specify a Y word, Y shouldn't change
[20:56:28] <cradek> but I think you are right because g53 docs say "to move in the machine coordinate system, ..." and that system doesn't rotate
[20:57:19] <cradek> I chose (and, coincidentally, failed to implement) design #2 without really thinking it through
[20:58:49] <cradek> seems like they are both tricky to do :-/
[20:59:56] <cradek> what - g91 is broken too - I guess I don't understand this yet
[21:03:23] <cradek> ugh, I tried to write find_ends's g53 case in terms of find_relative, but find_relative has got to be broken too, because it rotates both offsets
[21:07:08] <cradek> ok, it turns out this isn't going to be fixed tonight
[21:08:18] <cradek> rotation is so nice to have, but I think adding it was a mistake
[21:08:55] <skunkworks> that is what cad is for. (it is neat - but I think I have only used it a hand full of times)
[21:09:44] <skunkworks> but you can't take it away now... ;)
[22:24:55] -linuxcnc-github:#linuxcnc-devel- [13linuxcnc] 15SebKuzminsky closed issue #39: ja: Axis GUI DRO "homed" icons wrongness 02
https://github.com/LinuxCNC/linuxcnc/issues/39
[22:26:55] -linuxcnc-github:#linuxcnc-devel- [13linuxcnc] 15SebKuzminsky closed issue #40: ja: surprise switch to World mode when turning on 02
https://github.com/LinuxCNC/linuxcnc/issues/40
[22:46:18] <seb_kuzminsky> i was really glad to have rotation exactly one time, when i'd programmed a high-aspect-ratio part in an orientation that didnt fit my high-aspect-ratio work envelope