Apr 07 2017
12:32 AM pcw_mesa_ is now known as pcw_mesa
09:08 AM cts1085: In the version 2.8 Pre1 2959-GA38685a I am seeing an issue with EmcPos being sent to Kinematics - it is not including the Tool Offset (z) - This was working in 2.78
09:17 AM cts1085: in other words - is the EmcPos being sent to the KinematicsInverse function supposed to be in machine coordinates or relative coordinates?
09:23 AM cts1085: nevermind... i think i am just thinking about this the wrong way - of course EmcPos should be in machine coordinates...
09:40 AM cradek: cts1085: tool offset is added very early in the interpreter - you are surely mistaken about it being missing in master
09:40 AM cradek: be aware that simply changing an offset (any offset) doesn't change the machine's position immediately, it only changes the targets of subsequent moves
09:41 AM cradek: so no G10 or G43 commands that you issue will cause any motion and therefore any change in what your kinematics sees
09:42 AM cts1085: understood - i placed enough debugging comments into my Kins to confirm that the EmcPos is correct (including offsets) and agrees with the "Machine Coordinates" in Axis. thank you for your patience - i just got confused.
09:42 AM jepler: welcome cts1085
09:43 AM cradek: no problem, glad I could help
09:46 AM cts1085: question: I am including the tool number and offset as parameters into my kins - when they change the pins change immediately without issuing a move. is there a signal/pin that reflects the tool/offset at the actual next move rather than just the target? if not - no worries - just wondering how I can tell the state in my kins.
09:46 AM cradek: it is a mistake to do that
09:47 AM cradek: the offsets must happen earlier than kins, so you can have the moves be issued in a controlled way with correct constraints on acceleration and velocity etc
09:48 AM cts1085: That makes perfect sense
09:48 AM cradek: also you can change an offset, say G43 to change Z, and then move XY a bunch of times with no notice of the new Z yet
09:48 AM cradek: kins doesn't know any this
09:49 AM cradek: if you are having a problem that led you down this path of putting the tool offset in kins, let's talk about what that problem was and find a correct answer
09:49 AM cts1085: maybe my approach in my kins is wrong? (I am willing to learn) - i am adding a 4th axis where "B" rotates the spindle - as i issue g0 b0 to g0 b90 i want the spindle to rotate around the tool bit (z-offset) i have this now coded in my kins - is there a better way to do this?
09:50 AM cradek: yes, put the tool length on W instead of Z, and in your kins add W to B's effective radius
09:51 AM cradek: then you can do G43 [load W tool offset] and then G0 W0 will give a move in X/Z to pull the tool outward
09:52 AM cradek: bonus: you can even drill at any angle with G83 W...
09:54 AM cradek: http://git.linuxcnc.org/gitweb?p=linuxcnc.git;a=blob;f=src/emc/kinematics/maxkins.c;h=9f3ecb4e4c757bbec20951a85d51fd917ce4ce70;hb=a38685ae5fccffb6d8d86bb4b9acee5f639d2276
09:54 AM cts1085: ok - trying to wrap my head around this: T100 M6 G43 to load the tool offset Z and W? then next move include w0 to the command (e.g. g0 x100 z100 b0 w0) then leverage in the kins the w pos as the offset rather than the tooloffset on Z ?
09:54 AM cradek: this sample kins does that, for a setup with spindle on B
09:55 AM cradek: yes, with this setup there is no Z tool offset, only W, because W pivots with B, but Z doesn't pivot
09:56 AM cradek: in maxkins.c the pivot length is set with setp, not netted to anything - it doesn't change
09:57 AM cradek: it's just the gage length of the machine (distance from pivot to "tip" of a zero length tool)
09:58 AM cradek: Copyright (c) 2007 Chris Radek
09:58 AM cradek: jeez 10 years goes by fast
09:58 AM cradek: brb
09:58 AM cts1085: ok - in my case i have 4 axis (XZAB) it is a lathe so there is no "Y" - in my case the Z-offset is the distance between the end of the tool and the center of the B-Axis - i think i get what you are saying.
10:01 AM cradek: ooh sounds like an interesting machine. have a picture of the setup? I'm having trouble picturing it.
10:02 AM cts1085: i need to take one - i had posted the 3 axis version in the forum: https://forum.linuxcnc.org/show-your-stuff/27905-cnc-ornamental-lathe-big-thank-you
10:03 AM cts1085: where the tool post is in the picture i added a stepper rotary table to hold a new spindle (now controlled via VFD by Linuxcnc)
10:05 AM cts1085: actually that picture is really old - the ply for the X/Z table has been replaced with aluminum and i have added a probetip at 90 degrees to the spindle so i don't have to change bits for probing
10:09 AM cradek: cool!
10:10 AM cradek: sorry, I have to run - I'll read back later
10:16 AM stustev: when trying to move the config files from 2.7 to 2.8 I get the message the ini file needs to update - when I answer yes to update I get
10:16 AM stustev: the message the file is already updated with the message 20170211_1250
10:17 AM stustev: I touched the files back to 1 1 2016 and still get the same message ??
10:17 AM stustev: oh - forgot to mention I get errors when starting showing the axis and joints not configured properly
10:19 AM stustev: How do I change the config files to convince the script to modify them?
10:23 AM jepler: I think the script is looking at [EMC]VERSION. But changing [EMC]VERSION in order to trick update_ini into running twice is probably not going to fix a problem with the first conversion.
10:23 AM jepler: andypugh is the author / presumed maintainer of update_ini, but I see he's not here right now..
10:29 AM seb_kuzminsky: stustev: paste the .ini file somewhere, it should be pretty clear wheter it's safe to change VERSION
10:38 AM stustev: The file in 2.8 is the same as the file in 2.7. LinuxCNC reports the version needs to be updated. The script reports is as having been updated. Upon attempting to start LinuxCNC errors with axis and joint errors.
10:38 AM stustev: I am sure the file has not been updated.
10:40 AM stustev: restart attempts yield the same result
11:10 AM seb_kuzminsky: stustev: channelling jepler, what does [EMC]VERSION say?
11:10 AM seb_kuzminsky: if it's 1.0, try changing it to 0.0
11:10 AM seb_kuzminsky: and then run it with linuxcnc 2.8~pre, and it should auto-update correctly
11:39 AM DrippityDrops: I been working with someone to develop some 2-axis kinematics. At some point I would like to get it added to a release, should I just hand it off to someone specific or ???? This is what I have so far but I know it needs some work done to the kin file. It works... ish.. http://huntingtonscrew.com/linuxcnc/1.mp4
11:41 AM DrippityDrops: volume warning
11:42 AM DrippityDrops: This setup is two linear actuators which move in parallel to drive a rotary profiling spindle
11:50 AM jepler: DrippityDrops: sounds interesting
11:50 AM jepler: DrippityDrops: you can create pull requests on our github, if you're familiar with that. https://github.com/linuxcnc/linuxcnc
11:51 AM DrippityDrops: im extremely unfamiliar, I really just came in, edited another kin file and did a little math... which took about a week to figure out.
11:53 AM jepler: OK, maybe sharing it on the forum would be more your speed, then? "advanced configuration" might make sense. or "show your stuff" if you are most interested in showing off your machine design.
11:56 AM DrippityDrops: jepler: wget http://huntingtonscrew.com/im/2.mp4
11:56 AM DrippityDrops: wget http://huntingtonscrew.com/images/2.mp4
11:57 AM DrippityDrops: im mostly insterested in actually having something worth contributing back to the community hahhaa
12:00 PM Joe_Hildreth: cradec: You around?
12:00 PM jepler: DrippityDrops: I like your attitude
12:01 PM DrippityDrops: its very hard for people to contribute without know ALOT of different information
12:07 PM seb_kuzminsky: DrippityDrops: yeah, that's a big obstacle for sure :-/
12:08 PM seb_kuzminsky: we tried to help by describing in outline how to contribute, here: http://linuxcnc.org/docs/devel/html/code/contributing-to-linuxcnc.html
12:08 PM seb_kuzminsky: but there's no getting around the learning curve
12:29 PM Joe_Hildreth: seb: maybe you can help me a little.
12:30 PM KimK_laptop: DrippityDrops: your first video link loads, your second two do not.
12:30 PM Joe_Hildreth: git / github questions.
12:32 PM seb_kuzminsky: Joe_Hildreth: maybe! ask away
12:33 PM Joe_Hildreth: OK, you know I was working on the manpage thing. well, long story short. Chris accepted my changes and merged the manpage with 2.7 branch
12:33 PM seb_kuzminsky: yep, i saw that
12:33 PM Joe_Hildreth: then you said something about an error in my description and I wanted to fix it.
12:34 PM Joe_Hildreth: I added an upstream and pulled the master from the main repo to my machine.
12:34 PM seb_kuzminsky: ok pause there for a second
12:34 PM seb_kuzminsky: as you know i'm a nit-picker ;-)
12:34 PM Joe_Hildreth: Well, Chris, fixed an error with my email because i had it obfuscated.
12:34 PM Joe_Hildreth: No worries, I want it to be correct too.
12:35 PM seb_kuzminsky: you added a "remote" (not an "upstream"), and pulled its entire contents (not just its master branch) into your repo
12:35 PM seb_kuzminsky: just to get the git terminology straight
12:35 PM Joe_Hildreth: Well anyway, being new to git and github, I merged the changes with my local master branch but should have done an edit to show the proper email
12:36 PM Joe_Hildreth: OK, thank you. I will get it straight sooner or later, I hope.
12:36 PM seb_kuzminsky: :-)
12:37 PM seb_kuzminsky: do you know how git represents history as a directed acyclic graph of commits?
12:37 PM Joe_Hildreth: This happened when I done the commit. Then I pushed to my repository on github and then I noticed the following.
12:37 PM Joe_Hildreth: No sir.
12:37 PM seb_kuzminsky: (I'm not leading you on a wild goose chase, i promise)
12:37 PM Joe_Hildreth: But to undo, would I do a git reset <to the last commit>, then recommit the changes?
12:38 PM Joe_Hildreth: Well I mean to the last good commit where chris merged with 2.7
12:38 PM seb_kuzminsky: did you make your commit on your master branch or on your 2.7 branch? or on a different branch that you created?
12:38 PM Joe_Hildreth: I done it on my master branch.
12:39 PM Joe_Hildreth: This was before I realized that I should have created a separate branch. :-(
12:39 PM seb_kuzminsky: ok, and then chris cherry-picked it onto 2.7, modified it a little (your email addr), and merged 2.7 into master, is that right?
12:39 PM Joe_Hildreth: I am new to this stuff and seem to be learning by fire.
12:39 PM Joe_Hildreth: Yes that is right.
12:40 PM Joe_Hildreth: Is that why my original pull request never closed?
12:40 PM seb_kuzminsky: well rest assured everything is ok and nobody's gotten burnt yet
12:40 PM seb_kuzminsky: the original PR is not closed because what chris ended up merging is slightly different from what you offered in the PR (different branch, edited email addr)
12:40 PM Joe_Hildreth: Would I be better to delete my fork and start over since the original changes I made are there?
12:41 PM Joe_Hildreth: re-fork and start over so to speak?
12:41 PM seb_kuzminsky: the *intent* of the PR got merged, but in a modified way that gitbub doesn't recognize as identical to the actual PR
12:41 PM seb_kuzminsky: you don't have to re-clone, we can fix your repo easily using reset like you said above
12:42 PM seb_kuzminsky: have you made any commits to your master branch since a36d04b "Add hal_manualtoolchange manpage."?
12:42 PM Joe_Hildreth: OK, a little hand holding then? if I reset to the commit Chris made, then if I do a commit it will allow me to then edit?
12:43 PM seb_kuzminsky: yes, i will help with this right now
12:43 PM seb_kuzminsky: do you have any work that you've committed, other than the "add manpage" commit that chris modified and merged?
12:44 PM seb_kuzminsky: i'm trying to ask, is there anything in your git repo we need to save, or is chris's modify+merge of your "add manpage" commit the only thing you've done there
12:44 PM Joe_Hildreth: No
12:44 PM seb_kuzminsky: ok, great!
12:44 PM seb_kuzminsky: that makes it easy
12:45 PM Joe_Hildreth: After making the commit that added the manpage, I tried to sync upstream with mine.
12:45 PM Joe_Hildreth: Then made a commit that screwed everything up. Or at least it seams
12:45 PM seb_kuzminsky: so you have a master branch that has your one commit, and git.linuxcnc.org has a different master branch that has a single commit merging 2.7, which has a single commit which is chris's modified version of your commit, does that sound right?
12:46 PM seb_kuzminsky: you can look at this history graphically with "gitk", by the way
12:46 PM Joe_Hildreth: Yes, that is right.
12:46 PM seb_kuzminsky: ok, then what we're going to do is tell your git repo: "throw away whatever's on my master branch, and make it look exactly like the git.linuxcnc.org master branch", does that sound right?
12:47 PM Joe_Hildreth: So when I done a git pull on my local machine of upstream, git told me that there were differences between my manpage file and the one I pulled from upstream
12:47 PM seb_kuzminsky: yeah, git pull is not the right thing in this situation
12:47 PM seb_kuzminsky: i'll walk you through it
12:48 PM seb_kuzminsky: first, say "git remote" to list all the remotes your git repo knows about
12:48 PM Joe_Hildreth: Yes, that is what i want to do. Now I am working on my local linux box and not directly on github. Where am I doing this from?
12:48 PM seb_kuzminsky: we'll do all the work in your local git clone
12:48 PM Joe_Hildreth: I have origin and upstream
12:49 PM Joe_Hildreth: origin pointing to my github accnt and upstream to linucnc
12:49 PM seb_kuzminsky: and is it true that "origin" is your personal github repo, and "upstream" is the linuxcnc github repo?
12:49 PM seb_kuzminsky: heh, that's perfect
12:49 PM seb_kuzminsky: ok
12:49 PM seb_kuzminsky: next run "git fetch upstream"
12:49 PM Joe_Hildreth: Yes, origin is my github repo and upstream is linuxcnc github repo
12:50 PM Joe_Hildreth: done
12:50 PM seb_kuzminsky: that will copy all the history from upstream into your local repo, but will crucially *not* try to modify any of your local branches or anything
12:50 PM seb_kuzminsky: ok, good
12:50 PM seb_kuzminsky: next, 'git checkout master'
12:50 PM seb_kuzminsky: just to make sure you're on your local master branch, the one we're going to throw away
12:50 PM Joe_Hildreth: Already on 'master' Your branch is up-to-date with 'origin/master'.
12:51 PM seb_kuzminsky: huh
12:51 PM Joe_Hildreth: Sorry that was the output of the git checkout master
12:51 PM seb_kuzminsky: it's good that you're on master
12:51 PM seb_kuzminsky: oh, and origin is *your* github repo, not the linuxcnc github repo
12:51 PM seb_kuzminsky: ok so that's all fine then
12:51 PM seb_kuzminsky: so next, here comes the big magic step
12:51 PM seb_kuzminsky: git reset --hard upstream/master
12:51 PM seb_kuzminsky: that says:
12:52 PM Joe_Hildreth: correct, origin is my github repo, and upstream is linuxcnc github repo
12:52 PM seb_kuzminsky: forget my branch and any modified files in my local working directory, and make my current branch and my working directory be identical to upstream/master instead
12:53 PM Joe_Hildreth: The output was: HEAD is now at a38685a Merge branch '2.7'
12:54 PM seb_kuzminsky: good, a38685a is the tip of the linuxcnc master branch
12:54 PM Joe_Hildreth: That sha1 value matches the one that Chris done.
12:54 PM seb_kuzminsky: the "merge branch 2.7" is chris merging 2.7 into master, and 2.7 has the commit you wrote, that he modified slightly, so that's all as it should be
12:54 PM seb_kuzminsky: mission accomplished!
12:54 PM Joe_Hildreth: So now I can push to origin? (My github repo)
12:55 PM seb_kuzminsky: now at this point you should push this master branch to your github repo (origin)
12:55 PM seb_kuzminsky: yes
12:55 PM seb_kuzminsky: it's a little wonky because you're discarding commits on master, which git doesn't like
12:55 PM seb_kuzminsky: so you have to do it this way:
12:56 PM seb_kuzminsky: git push --force origin master
12:56 PM seb_kuzminsky: the --force says, "i know i'm asking you to forget commits htat i've already pushed, but really its ok"
12:57 PM Joe_Hildreth: ok, says: + 24f21cd...a38685a master -> master (forced update)
12:57 PM seb_kuzminsky: perfect
12:57 PM Joe_Hildreth: Thank you seb for the help.
12:57 PM seb_kuzminsky: i think everything is good now
12:58 PM seb_kuzminsky: you're welcome! i'm happy to help
12:58 PM Joe_Hildreth: Now, some general questions.
12:58 PM seb_kuzminsky: ok
12:58 PM seb_kuzminsky: oh, an interjection from me:
12:58 PM Joe_Hildreth: Should I create a local branch for my changes, then do PR from that branch to master?
12:59 PM seb_kuzminsky: if you want to learn some of the git internals that we used to do this, here's a good resource: https://git-scm.com/book/en/v2/Git-Branching-Branches-in-a-Nutshell
12:59 PM seb_kuzminsky: yes, local branches are very helpful when doing PRs
12:59 PM seb_kuzminsky: i usually make a branch for each PR
12:59 PM seb_kuzminsky: in your local repo, do something like this:
12:59 PM Joe_Hildreth: I will read the docs you linked/
01:00 PM seb_kuzminsky: git fetch upstream # make sure i have all the latest info from the linuxcnc github
01:01 PM seb_kuzminsky: git checkout -b my-nifty-pr upstream/2.7 # create a new branch named my-nifty-pr, starting at upstream's 2.7 branch that i just fetched, and check the new branch out
01:01 PM seb_kuzminsky: ("checking out a branch" is git-speak for "switch my working directory to that branch, and put any commits i make onto that branch")
01:01 PM seb_kuzminsky: then edit, compile, and test, and commit when you're happy
01:02 PM seb_kuzminsky: then:
01:02 PM seb_kuzminsky: git push origin my-nifty-pr # push my new branch to *my* github
01:02 PM seb_kuzminsky: click around in the github website to create the new PR, making sure you ask for it to be merged into the correct branch in the linuxcnc github
01:03 PM seb_kuzminsky: the branch you ask your PR to be merged into should match the branch you started your branch in, in the "git checkout -b" above
01:03 PM seb_kuzminsky: does that all make sense?
01:04 PM Joe_Hildreth: Yes,
01:04 PM Joe_Hildreth: After my branch has been merged, then do I merge my branch back in locally?
01:04 PM seb_kuzminsky: great :-)
01:04 PM seb_kuzminsky: no, no need
01:05 PM Joe_Hildreth: Just update the master then, and perhaps delete my branch
01:05 PM seb_kuzminsky: when someone merges your PR, they create a new commit in the 2.7 branch (or whatever the PR is for) that merges your branch into the target branch
01:05 PM seb_kuzminsky: your branch is unaffected, since the commit goes into the 2.7 branch, not your branch
01:05 PM seb_kuzminsky: when next you fetch upstream, you'll get the updated 2.7 branch with the merge commit that brings in all the commits from your local branch
01:06 PM seb_kuzminsky: at that point you can delete your local branch (assuming you've not made more commits there since the PR, of course)
01:06 PM seb_kuzminsky: because all those commits are in the "mainline" branch now, via the merge of the PR
01:07 PM seb_kuzminsky: and the next local branch you create (with git checkout -b another-nifty-pr upstream/2.7) will start from a commit that includes all the previous work you did
01:07 PM seb_kuzminsky: since upstream/2.7 includes the merge of your PR
01:08 PM Joe_Hildreth: Thank you. That helped a lot!!! I have copied this off to a doc to reference later as well.
01:08 PM seb_kuzminsky: awesome
01:08 PM Joe_Hildreth: Thank you so much Sebastian
01:09 PM seb_kuzminsky: i find the key to learning how to work with git is understanding how it represents commits, and how it represents branches as a dag of commits
01:09 PM seb_kuzminsky: welcome! thanks for climbing this learning curve to help us work on linuxcnc!
01:09 PM Joe_Hildreth: My cnc stuff is all router hobby related, and my programming to this point has mostly been c/c++ and PHP, mysql, css (web stuff).
01:10 PM seb_kuzminsky: it's a great hobby :-)
01:10 PM Joe_Hildreth: So as far as coding, I don't know how much help I can be, but am willing to help where I can. I am trying desparately to really learn how it works. I have sons and friends who seem to think I am their resource.
01:11 PM seb_kuzminsky: teaching is a great way to learn :-)
01:11 PM Joe_Hildreth: But I don't want to mis-direct them. That is why I was asking all the questions about the hal manual tol change, because I started by picking apart my config to see what was going on.
01:12 PM seb_kuzminsky: sure
01:12 PM seb_kuzminsky: and making it easier for the next person coming after you by taking the time to write up the hal_manualtoolchanger manpage, and learning all this git nonsense
01:12 PM Joe_Hildreth: I am a computer networg guy by trade, so maybe that is why I am possessed with the HOW?
01:13 PM seb_kuzminsky: well i'm taking off for a bit
01:14 PM Joe_Hildreth: I will be sure to read the docs you linked earlier. And thanks again for helping me through the pickle. I will take this new found knowledge and apply it to the edit I need to make to the manpage. Good practice.
01:14 PM seb_kuzminsky: nice talking with you, bye for now!
01:14 PM Joe_Hildreth: Thank you again sir.
01:14 PM Joe_Hildreth: cya
01:15 PM DrippityDrops: KimK_laptop: probably have to WGET the link and then play it. wget http://huntingtonscrew.com/images/2.mp4
01:19 PM DrippityDrops: seb_kuzminsky: if you scroll up about 4 pages of text and read from there you can see why people to contribute :)
01:19 PM DrippityDrops: dont contribute*
01:20 PM stustev: sorry about the delay - my wife was in a car wreck just after the last post
01:20 PM stustev: everything's ok
01:20 PM DrippityDrops: oh good
01:20 PM stustev: I made the version number blank and the script did it's thing
01:20 PM stustev: thanks
01:40 PM DrippityDrops: KimK_laptop: I compressed it from 40mb to 5mb maybe that will help, new filename is here http://huntingtonscrew.com/linuxcnc/3.mp4
01:40 PM DrippityDrops: still loads weird for me no idea why
01:42 PM KGB-linuxcnc: 03Dewey Garrett 05master 3494ba1 06linuxcnc 10docs/src/config/ini-config.txt 10docs/src/getting-started/updating-linuxcnc.txt updating-linuxcnc.txt:notes on jogging/homing/kins * 14http://git.linuxcnc.org/?p=linuxcnc.git;a=commitdiff;h=3494ba1
02:16 PM KimK_laptop: DrippityDrops: It seems (at least here) that a leading www is needed on that link, else I can't find it. Not sure why. But it works OK with it.
02:20 PM cradek: DrippityDrops: another thing you might see is that some special folks are willing to learn to do things that are complicated, in order to help themselves and others around them. Also, when they appear, others like that will help them.
03:02 PM DrippityDrops: cradek: it seems there is a very strong pattern in linux which appears to work in a tier system as far as i can tell. The userbase and contributor base is self regulating. You have to be X amount of self educating so you can attain the things you need for yourself at which you are also treading in areas where you can support other peoples projects. Like linuxcnc, its just hard enough to configure that you don't attract tons of people which ar
03:39 PM seb_kuzminsky: pcw_home, jepler : instead of a $600 softiron machine to run virtualized arm64, i'm thinking maybe this $30 "pi-type" board: http://linuxgizmos.com/latest-orange-pi-offers-quad-a53-cores-and-2gb-of-ram/
03:40 PM seb_kuzminsky: the manufacturer supports jessie on it: http://www.orangepi.org/downloadresources/orangepiwin/2017-04-01/orangepiwin_00c6f8bd5fc10d03fd2cdd49.html
03:40 PM * seb_kuzminsky wonders, "how bad can it really be?"
03:40 PM * cradek wonders, "is he new at this or something?"
03:40 PM cradek: sorry
03:40 PM seb_kuzminsky: heh
03:41 PM cradek: it's just that they're all terrible
03:41 PM seb_kuzminsky: yes they are
03:41 PM seb_kuzminsky: :-/
03:46 PM cradek: omg I must be awesome
03:46 PM cradek: past-me noticed he was running out of checks and ordered more, and then put them somewhere current-me would find them
03:47 PM seb_kuzminsky: dude's got your back
03:47 PM seb_kuzminsky: i hope he took one of your beers out of your fridge as payment
03:47 PM cradek: probably!
03:56 PM seb_kuzminsky: oh wait, no, i should have made fun of past-you for being so far in the past that they thought current-you would want actual paper checks
03:56 PM seb_kuzminsky: next time i get this setup i'll do that one instead
03:57 PM mozmck: what's a check?
03:57 PM seb_kuzminsky: it's like the personal version of governmental fiat currency
03:59 PM mozmck: heh, except our current fiat currency is issued by a private corporation...
04:00 PM seb_kuzminsky: really?!
04:00 PM cradek: sometimes I can either write a check or play "I wonder if it's adblock or privacy badger or firefox that's making this not work, or is it just broken"
04:00 PM cradek: guess which one I hate less (it's close competition)
04:02 PM cradek: it could be worse - I could try to use my phone to do it!
04:02 PM cradek: omg
04:02 PM cradek: that makes me shiver
04:03 PM cradek: there's probably a lincoln electric company bill paying app that uses apple pay to access your google wallet and costs $5 each time and posts that you paid your bill to your facebook wall
04:04 PM cradek: and shows you ads
04:04 PM stustev: your personal version is issued by a private corporation
04:05 PM cradek: and tells facebook and apple and google how much power I used this month, for some reason
04:08 PM cradek: it's hard for a T-rex to put stamps on envelopes
04:20 PM pcw_mesa: Starting to layout a new FPGA/Breakout like a 7I96 but With RASPI SPI mechanical
04:20 PM pcw_mesa: interface but easy to get discouraged by Genes timings (lets use really marginal hardware
04:20 PM pcw_mesa: to save ~$60 system cost, sigh )
04:20 PM cradek: speaking of ads, ranch sauce tater tot bacon nacho cheese pizza
04:21 PM pcw_mesa: sounds like a fire hazzard
04:26 PM cradek: pcw_mesa: that sounds like a neat product if you can somehow wire in enough self-defense to make it reliable
04:28 PM pcw_mesa: It should not suffer as much from Genes ground shift issues since theres no cable
09:24 PM DrippityDrops: There are tons of extremely talented people gathering around linuxcnc, individuals specializing in everything from plc, toolpaths, kinematics, UI building, tooling, industrial controls, complex robotics, high and low volume production environments theres even a guy to design specialized cards if needed. Why arent we building complex machinery which can compete with big players?
09:28 PM DrippityDrops: What I mean is, most of us already have some manufacturing machines and businesses of our own. Would it be that big of a stretch for us to provide machinery which is can be quickly deployed and scalable to the Automation Era which we are at the mouth of.
09:31 PM cradek: that's a hard question. I could only answer it for my own situation.
09:31 PM DrippityDrops: do tell
09:32 PM cradek: it's just that that doesn't further any of my goals
09:32 PM DrippityDrops: I have two goals, financial freedom and revolutionize the automation industry.
09:33 PM cradek: I'm here for two reasons: around 1998 I wanted a control that would run my own machine[s]. that part is done now. also I want to give the tools of manufacturing to the people, instead of having it controlled by a few corporations
09:33 PM DrippityDrops: *
09:33 PM DrippityDrops: ^
09:33 PM cradek: I have no desire to manufacture machines and try to get rich
09:34 PM DrippityDrops: well you have done fantastic work in your time with it
09:34 PM cradek: I'd rather travel around and help small shop owners or even just private individuals retrofit whatever old crap they have nearby and start making things
09:34 PM cradek: in exchange for pizza or something
09:34 PM DrippityDrops: yes, but to do it without pressure of cost would be delightful
09:35 PM DrippityDrops: I have been looking into automation for family farms
09:35 PM cradek: the john deere licensing issue has caused a real todo lately
09:35 PM DrippityDrops: how so
09:36 PM cradek: I don't know if anything will come of it. the right-to-repair laws might come to something, but I doubt it's anywhere as useful as free software in fixing the problem.
09:37 PM cradek: john deere has settled on rent-seeking instead of innovation: they're trying to control the whole repair market by licensing instead of selling their tractors' control systems
09:37 PM DrippityDrops: ahh
09:37 PM DrippityDrops: these control systems are Radio yes?
09:37 PM cradek: this really pisses off farmers and their red-state legislators, because farmers are used to fixing stuff and making do
09:38 PM cradek: I think it's all software on the tractor, from the engine control to the gps guidance stuff
09:38 PM cradek: you should google if you want details - I don't know them, but I've sure heard the stirring
09:39 PM DrippityDrops: I wonder if there will be some fcc issues and so forth you may need to handle in order to know the unit is approved by weights and measures or some crap
09:39 PM cradek: sure there are lots of excuses you might try
09:39 PM cradek: you and your lobbyists
09:39 PM DrippityDrops: jajaj
09:39 PM cradek: who's louder, farmers or lobbyists? we'll see.
09:39 PM cradek: anyway
09:39 PM DrippityDrops: :)
09:40 PM cradek: robust free software is the only way to defeat all that garbage
09:40 PM DrippityDrops: have you talked to many farmers about automation on their land?
09:40 PM cradek: nope
09:40 PM DrippityDrops: I have called a couple to get an idea about how it can help
09:40 PM cradek: cool
09:40 PM DrippityDrops: they were very insightful and open to try things
09:40 PM cradek: I think you mistake me for someone looking for more work :-P
09:41 PM DrippityDrops: well thats the bad thing about opportunities, once you learn how to find them, you never know which ones to take on
09:54 PM DrippityDrops: honestly though, we can pull tricks out of any old hat you put in front of us. This group of people that float around lcnc consistantly tackle problems corporations spend millions of dollars to get figured out. Why not just knock out a couple big projects, scale them and buy everyone involved new tools and clean shops so we can each focus on doing what we love and not scraping ebay for odds and ends.
10:02 PM cradek: heh, same answer :-)
10:03 PM DrippityDrops: worth a shot rewording I suppose =F
10:03 PM cradek: but please do try! maybe you'll be a rich patron to some of us who just want to work on the software.
10:05 PM Joe_Hildreth: cradek: Just wanted to thank you for the notes you left the other day, andswering my questions.
10:05 PM DrippityDrops: Well it doesnt matter, if I do well and I see your name in the src code your getting your gerstner
10:05 PM cradek: welcome, glad you saw them
10:05 PM DrippityDrops: more times than I can count
10:05 PM cradek: looks like seb helped you earlier too, that's great
10:05 PM Joe_Hildreth: Between you an seb I have came a long way.
10:06 PM DrippityDrops: yeah he seems to be sharp
10:06 PM DrippityDrops: I have no idea how you even got on this road
10:06 PM DrippityDrops: I was probably 17yo when I first looked into it
10:06 PM Joe_Hildreth: I even created a new branch to make my updates on off the 2.7 branch and made another pull request. Fixed my fubar'd email too.
10:07 PM DrippityDrops: Ill be hitting you up sometime soon here joe about git more than likely :P
10:08 PM DrippityDrops: I need to learn it and im no programmer.
10:43 PM DrippityDrops: pcw_mesa: I have a totally serious question here, in theory, without changing the physical hardware of your cards. Can we built three completely standalone linuxcnc machines each with their own pc, controller, drive and motor. Set one build up for X axis one for Z axis and one for spindle. Would it be possible to get them all to work in unison under an umbrella GUI.
10:45 PM DrippityDrops: if anyone else can answer this that would also be great I guess it has alot more to with the software than the hardware... I think
11:00 PM DrippityDrops: It has to work, all I have to do is fork the encoder outputs of each motor and emulate the corresponding joint feedback on each system which is NOT that motor. Each embedded system would think they are in full control of the machine when really the all are producing the exact same gcode for their "ghost" joints. This process would result in an infinity expandable modularized cnc machine.
11:10 PM KGB-linuxcnc: 03Sebastian Kuzminsky 052.7 d13d3b9 06linuxcnc Merge remote-tracking branch 'joe-hildreth/update_manpage' into 2.7 * 14http://git.linuxcnc.org/?p=linuxcnc.git;a=commitdiff;h=d13d3b9
11:10 PM KGB-linuxcnc: 03Sebastian Kuzminsky 05master 2e08854 06linuxcnc Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/2.7' * 14http://git.linuxcnc.org/?p=linuxcnc.git;a=commitdiff;h=2e08854
11:20 PM seb_kuzminsky: yay! thanks Joe_Hildreth!
11:25 PM seb_kuzminsky: the fix for #248 looks great too
11:26 PM seb_kuzminsky: there's a cool thing you can do; when you make a commit that fixes a github issue, say "fixes #248" in the commit message, and github will automatically close the issue when the PR is merged
11:26 PM seb_kuzminsky: (you can also close the issue manually of course)
11:27 PM KGB-linuxcnc: 03Sebastian Kuzminsky 05master 4439b08 06linuxcnc Merge remote-tracking branch 'joe-hildreth/issue_248' * 14http://git.linuxcnc.org/?p=linuxcnc.git;a=commitdiff;h=4439b08
11:52 PM Joe_Hildreth: seb: I dodn't know that, I will try to remember for next time.