test message

[Ivan Baggett]

Just joined eLua list, is this thing on?

Ivan


_______________________________________________
eLua-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/elua-dev

[BogdanM]

On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 10:38 PM, Ivan Baggett <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Just joined eLua list, is this thing on?

We hear you loud and clean Ivan :) Welcome to the list!

Best,
Bogdan
_______________________________________________
eLua-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/elua-dev

[Ivan Baggett]

On 2/12/2011 4:07 PM, Bogdan Marinescu wrote:

On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 10:38 PM, Ivan Baggett [hidden email] wrote:

Just joined eLua list, is this thing on?

We hear you loud and clean Ivan :) Welcome to the list!

Best,
Bogdan

Thank you.

Since I'm new to the eLua list, let me state my main reason for being here is my interest in using eLua on the PIC32.  I do a lot of work with Microchip stuff, and while their older architectures don't have what it takes compared to the ARM chips, the PIC32 is a new deal, based on the MIPS 4K embedded core.  I'm not here to debate or advocate architectures, though.  My reason for using PIC32 was that about 2 years ago I started a design which would have been based on a Luminary Cortex-M3 part.  However, the no-stock and insane lead times that occurred forced me to cancel that design and use something else.  That something else was a PIC32.  I see on the eLua site that PIC32 is mentioned as a port in progress, but no details.  Can someone bring me up to speed on what has been done with the PIC32 port, and what remains to be done?  I'm willing to render assistance with tools procurement, but I've never ported eLua, so I have no idea what work is required to do that.

Best regards,
Ivan Baggett





_______________________________________________
eLua-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/elua-dev

[King, Mike]

I’m also interested in the PIC32 port.

 

 

From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Ivan Baggett
Sent: Saturday, February 12, 2011 4:26 PM
To: Bogdan Marinescu; eLua Users and Development List (www.eluaproject.net)
Subject: [eLua-dev] PIC32 port status?

 

On 2/12/2011 4:07 PM, Bogdan Marinescu wrote:

On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 10:38 PM, Ivan Baggett [hidden email] wrote:

Just joined eLua list, is this thing on?

We hear you loud and clean Ivan :) Welcome to the list!

Best,

Bogdan

Thank you.

Since I'm new to the eLua list, let me state my main reason for being here is my interest in using eLua on the PIC32.  I do a lot of work with Microchip stuff, and while their older architectures don't have what it takes compared to the ARM chips, the PIC32 is a new deal, based on the MIPS 4K embedded core.  I'm not here to debate or advocate architectures, though.  My reason for using PIC32 was that about 2 years ago I started a design which would have been based on a Luminary Cortex-M3 part.  However, the no-stock and insane lead times that occurred forced me to cancel that design and use something else.  That something else was a PIC32.  I see on the eLua site that PIC32 is mentioned as a port in progress, but no details.  Can someone bring me up to speed on what has been done with the PIC32 port, and what remains to be done?  I'm willing to render assistance with tools procurement, but I've never ported eLua, so I have no idea what work is required to do that.

Best regards,
Ivan Baggett

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain information that is confidential or proprietary to K&L Microwave, Inc. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If this communication has been transmitted from a U.S. location it may also contain data subject to the International Traffic in Arms Regulations or U.S. Export Administration Regulations and, if so, cannot be disseminated, distributed or copied to foreign nationals, residing in the U.S. or abroad, without the prior approval of the U.S. Department of State or appropriate export licensing authority. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and delete or destroy all copies of this e-mail message and/or any file attachment(s).

_______________________________________________
eLua-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/elua-dev

[Kevin Vermeer]

And I'm interested as well!  I have a couple parts (PIC32MX795F512L) in shipment, and am developing a board for them when I'm not at work or typing this email.  I hope it wasn't my statement a few weeks back that I'd be working on developing these that got this on the site, as it's likely to be at least mid-March before I get "Hello, World" loaded on the board, and developing drivers for a few peripherals will take precedence over getting eLua to work on it, so it's likely to be a couple months before I start working on porting it to my board.

What is everyone else using for development?  From Microchip, there's a Starter Kit, USB Starter Kit, and an Ethernet (and USB) Starter Kit.   The Explorer 16 has a compatible board, and there's also a Multimedia Expansion board for the Starter Kits.  I'll be working on my own board, but I'll be trying to make my modules as board-independent as possible, and hope to benefit from (and provide benefit to) anyone using another tool.
--
Kevin Vermeer

On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 11:44 AM, King, Mike <[hidden email]> wrote:

I’m also interested in the PIC32 port.

 

 

From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Ivan Baggett
Sent: Saturday, February 12, 2011 4:26 PM
To: Bogdan Marinescu; eLua Users and Development List (www.eluaproject.net)
Subject: [eLua-dev] PIC32 port status?

 

On 2/12/2011 4:07 PM, Bogdan Marinescu wrote:

On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 10:38 PM, Ivan Baggett [hidden email] wrote:

Just joined eLua list, is this thing on?

We hear you loud and clean Ivan :) Welcome to the list!

Best,

Bogdan

Thank you.

Since I'm new to the eLua list, let me state my main reason for being here is my interest in using eLua on the PIC32.  I do a lot of work with Microchip stuff, and while their older architectures don't have what it takes compared to the ARM chips, the PIC32 is a new deal, based on the MIPS 4K embedded core.  I'm not here to debate or advocate architectures, though.  My reason for using PIC32 was that about 2 years ago I started a design which would have been based on a Luminary Cortex-M3 part.  However, the no-stock and insane lead times that occurred forced me to cancel that design and use something else.  That something else was a PIC32.  I see on the eLua site that PIC32 is mentioned as a port in progress, but no details.  Can someone bring me up to speed on what has been done with the PIC32 port, and what remains to be done?  I'm willing to render assistance with tools procurement, but I've never ported eLua, so I have no idea what work is required to do that.

Best regards,
Ivan Baggett

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain information that is confidential or proprietary to K&L Microwave, Inc. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If this communication has been transmitted from a U.S. location it may also contain data subject to the International Traffic in Arms Regulations or U.S. Export Administration Regulations and, if so, cannot be disseminated, distributed or copied to foreign nationals, residing in the U.S. or abroad, without the prior approval of the U.S. Department of State or appropriate export licensing authority. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and delete or destroy all copies of this e-mail message and/or any file attachment(s).

_______________________________________________
eLua-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/elua-dev

_______________________________________________
eLua-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/elua-dev

[Ivan Baggett]

> What is everyone else using for development?  From Microchip, there's a
> Starter Kit, USB Starter Kit, and an Ethernet (and USB) Starter Kit.   The
> Explorer 16 has a compatible board, and there's also a Multimedia
> Expansion
> board for the Starter Kits.  I'll be working on my own board, but I'll be
> trying to make my modules as board-independent as possible, and hope to
> benefit from (and provide benefit to) anyone using another tool.
> --
> Kevin Vermeer
>

I'm using the PIC32 Ethernet Starter Kit (DM320004) with the PIC32 I/O
Expansion Board (DM320002).  Using MPLAB v8.63.  Have started playing
around with MPLAB X, and I like it so far.  The call graph feature is
awesome.  Compile times are a bit slow.

--
Best regards,
Ivan Baggett


_______________________________________________
eLua-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/elua-dev

[King, Mike]

Who’s developing the port for PIC32?  I may start it if someone else hasn’t started it within a few months.  I’ve heard the PIC32 toolchain can be built from source without Microchip’s code optimization limitations.  Does anyone know of any pre-built binaries or instructions on building from source?

 

From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Kevin Vermeer
Sent: Monday, February 14, 2011 12:52 PM
To: eLua Users and Development List (www.eluaproject.net)
Subject: Re: [eLua-dev] PIC32 port status?

 

And I'm interested as well!  I have a couple parts (PIC32MX795F512L) in shipment, and am developing a board for them when I'm not at work or typing this email.  I hope it wasn't my statement a few weeks back that I'd be working on developing these that got this on the site, as it's likely to be at least mid-March before I get "Hello, World" loaded on the board, and developing drivers for a few peripherals will take precedence over getting eLua to work on it, so it's likely to be a couple months before I start working on porting it to my board.

What is everyone else using for development?  From Microchip, there's a Starter Kit, USB Starter Kit, and an Ethernet (and USB) Starter Kit.   The Explorer 16 has a compatible board, and there's also a Multimedia Expansion board for the Starter Kits.  I'll be working on my own board, but I'll be trying to make my modules as board-independent as possible, and hope to benefit from (and provide benefit to) anyone using another tool.
--
Kevin Vermeer

On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 11:44 AM, King, Mike <[hidden email]> wrote:

I’m also interested in the PIC32 port.

 

 

From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Ivan Baggett
Sent: Saturday, February 12, 2011 4:26 PM
To: Bogdan Marinescu; eLua Users and Development List (www.eluaproject.net)
Subject: [eLua-dev] PIC32 port status?

 

On 2/12/2011 4:07 PM, Bogdan Marinescu wrote:

On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 10:38 PM, Ivan Baggett [hidden email] wrote:

Just joined eLua list, is this thing on?

We hear you loud and clean Ivan :) Welcome to the list!

Best,

Bogdan

Thank you.

Since I'm new to the eLua list, let me state my main reason for being here is my interest in using eLua on the PIC32.  I do a lot of work with Microchip stuff, and while their older architectures don't have what it takes compared to the ARM chips, the PIC32 is a new deal, based on the MIPS 4K embedded core.  I'm not here to debate or advocate architectures, though.  My reason for using PIC32 was that about 2 years ago I started a design which would have been based on a Luminary Cortex-M3 part.  However, the no-stock and insane lead times that occurred forced me to cancel that design and use something else.  That something else was a PIC32.  I see on the eLua site that PIC32 is mentioned as a port in progress, but no details.  Can someone bring me up to speed on what has been done with the PIC32 port, and what remains to be done?  I'm willing to render assistance with tools procurement, but I've never ported eLua, so I have no idea what work is required to do that.

Best regards,
Ivan Baggett

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain information that is confidential or proprietary to K&L Microwave, Inc. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If this communication has been transmitted from a U.S. location it may also contain data subject to the International Traffic in Arms Regulations or U.S. Export Administration Regulations and, if so, cannot be disseminated, distributed or copied to foreign nationals, residing in the U.S. or abroad, without the prior approval of the U.S. Department of State or appropriate export licensing authority. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and delete or destroy all copies of this e-mail message and/or any file attachment(s).

_______________________________________________
eLua-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/elua-dev

 

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain information that is confidential or proprietary to K&L Microwave, Inc. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If this communication has been transmitted from a U.S. location it may also contain data subject to the International Traffic in Arms Regulations or U.S. Export Administration Regulations and, if so, cannot be disseminated, distributed or copied to foreign nationals, residing in the U.S. or abroad, without the prior approval of the U.S. Department of State or appropriate export licensing authority. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and delete or destroy all copies of this e-mail message and/or any file attachment(s).

_______________________________________________
eLua-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/elua-dev

[Dado Sutter]

Hello list,

On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 15:52, Kevin Vermeer <[hidden email]> wrote:

And I'm interested as well!  I have a couple parts (PIC32MX795F512L) in shipment, and am developing a board for them when I'm not at work or typing this email.  I hope it wasn't my statement a few weeks back that I'd be working on developing these that got this on the site,

I'm afraid it was :)
 

as it's likely to be at least mid-March before I get "Hello, World" loaded on the board,

which doesn't sound like too long to wait.
 

and developing drivers for a few peripherals will take precedence over getting eLua to work on it, so it's likely to be a couple months before I start working on porting it to my board.

Can't you use some ready libs for the peripherals and work only on the (easy) Lua binds ?
 

What is everyone else using for development?  From Microchip, there's a Starter Kit, USB Starter Kit, and an Ethernet (and USB) Starter Kit.   The Explorer 16 has a compatible board, and there's also a Multimedia Expansion board for the Starter Kits.  I'll be working on my own board, but I'll be trying to make my modules as board-independent as possible, and hope to benefit from (and provide benefit to) anyone using another tool.

This is not a resume of our history or an official roadmap but we tend to be pretty busy on the next many months ahead, on some core features, refactoring, doc/site(s) and some other ports that gained priority for other strategic reasons.
Still, we want and will do our best to help all the community initiatives for new platforms and modules ports.

For the PIC32 initiative, I can offer and help to configure some of our online tools to help, like our tracker (I can create a "sprint" for the PIC32 port on Dashboard) and our wiki (we can have separate pages for it too).
Of course the list will be always available for technical discussions too.
Pls let me know if you need anything I can do now.

Kevin Vermeer

Best
Dado


 

On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 11:44 AM, King, Mike <[hidden email]> wrote:

I’m also interested in the PIC32 port.

 

 

From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Ivan Baggett
Sent: Saturday, February 12, 2011 4:26 PM
To: Bogdan Marinescu; eLua Users and Development List (www.eluaproject.net)
Subject: [eLua-dev] PIC32 port status?

 

On 2/12/2011 4:07 PM, Bogdan Marinescu wrote:

On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 10:38 PM, Ivan Baggett [hidden email] wrote:

Just joined eLua list, is this thing on?

We hear you loud and clean Ivan :) Welcome to the list!

Best,

Bogdan

Thank you.

Since I'm new to the eLua list, let me state my main reason for being here is my interest in using eLua on the PIC32.  I do a lot of work with Microchip stuff, and while their older architectures don't have what it takes compared to the ARM chips, the PIC32 is a new deal, based on the MIPS 4K embedded core.  I'm not here to debate or advocate architectures, though.  My reason for using PIC32 was that about 2 years ago I started a design which would have been based on a Luminary Cortex-M3 part.  However, the no-stock and insane lead times that occurred forced me to cancel that design and use something else.  That something else was a PIC32.  I see on the eLua site that PIC32 is mentioned as a port in progress, but no details.  Can someone bring me up to speed on what has been done with the PIC32 port, and what remains to be done?  I'm willing to render assistance with tools procurement, but I've never ported eLua, so I have no idea what work is required to do that.

Best regards,
Ivan Baggett

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain information that is confidential or proprietary to K&L Microwave, Inc. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If this communication has been transmitted from a U.S. location it may also contain data subject to the International Traffic in Arms Regulations or U.S. Export Administration Regulations and, if so, cannot be disseminated, distributed or copied to foreign nationals, residing in the U.S. or abroad, without the prior approval of the U.S. Department of State or appropriate export licensing authority. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and delete or destroy all copies of this e-mail message and/or any file attachment(s).

_______________________________________________
eLua-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/elua-dev

_______________________________________________
eLua-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/elua-dev

_______________________________________________
eLua-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/elua-dev

[Tim Michals]

Is it acceptable to use MPLAB has the build tool and use Microchip libraries?

---

From: Dado Sutter <[hidden email]>
To: eLua Users and Development List (www.eluaproject.net)
Sent: Mon, February 14, 2011 12:09:32 PM
Subject: Re: [eLua-dev] PIC32 port status?

Hello list,

On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 15:52, Kevin Vermeer <[hidden email]> wrote:

And I'm interested as well!  I have a couple parts (PIC32MX795F512L) in shipment, and am developing a board for them when I'm not at work or typing this email.  I hope it wasn't my statement a few weeks back that I'd be working on developing these that got this on the site,

I'm afraid it was :)
 

as it's likely to be at least mid-March before I get "Hello, World" loaded on the board,

which doesn't sound like too long to wait.
 

and developing drivers for a few peripherals will take precedence over getting eLua to work on it, so it's likely to be a couple months before I start working on porting it to my board.

Can't you use some ready libs for the peripherals and work only on the (easy) Lua binds ?
 

What is everyone else using for development?  From Microchip, there's a Starter Kit, USB Starter Kit, and an Ethernet (and USB) Starter Kit.   The Explorer 16 has a compatible board, and there's also a Multimedia Expansion board for the Starter Kits.  I'll be working on my own board, but I'll be trying to make my modules as board-independent as possible, and hope to benefit from (and provide benefit to) anyone using another tool.

This is not a resume of our history or an official roadmap but we tend to be pretty busy on the next many months ahead, on some core features, refactoring, doc/site(s) and some other ports that gained priority for other strategic reasons.
Still, we want and will do our best to help all the community initiatives for new platforms and modules ports.

For the PIC32 initiative, I can offer and help to configure some of our online tools to help, like our tracker (I can create a "sprint" for the PIC32 port on Dashboard) and our wiki (we can have separate pages for it too).
Of course the list will be always available for technical discussions too.
Pls let me know if you need anything I can do now.

Kevin Vermeer

Best
Dado


 

On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 11:44 AM, King, Mike <[hidden email]> wrote:

I’m also interested in the PIC32 port.

 

 

From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Ivan Baggett
Sent: Saturday, February 12, 2011 4:26 PM
To: Bogdan Marinescu; eLua Users and Development List (www.eluaproject.net)
Subject: [eLua-dev] PIC32 port status?

 

On 2/12/2011 4:07 PM, Bogdan Marinescu wrote:

On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 10:38 PM, Ivan Baggett [hidden email] wrote:

Just joined eLua list, is this thing on?

We hear you loud and clean Ivan :) Welcome to the list!

Best,

Bogdan

Thank you.

Since I'm new to the eLua list, let me state my main reason for being here is my interest in using eLua on the PIC32.  I do a lot of work with Microchip stuff, and while their older architectures don't have what it takes compared to the ARM chips, the PIC32 is a new deal, based on the MIPS 4K embedded core.  I'm not here to debate or advocate architectures, though.  My reason for using PIC32 was that about 2 years ago I started a design which would have been based on a Luminary Cortex-M3 part.  However, the no-stock and insane lead times that occurred forced me to cancel that design and use something else.  That something else was a PIC32.  I see on the eLua site that PIC32 is mentioned as a port in progress, but no details.  Can someone bring me up to speed on what has been done with the PIC32 port, and what remains to be done?  I'm willing to render assistance with tools procurement, but I've never ported eLua, so I have no idea what work is required to do that.

Best regards,
Ivan Baggett

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain information that is confidential or proprietary to K&L Microwave, Inc. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If this communication has been transmitted from a U.S. location it may also contain data subject to the International Traffic in Arms Regulations or U.S. Export Administration Regulations and, if so, cannot be disseminated, distributed or copied to foreign nationals, residing in the U.S. or abroad, without the prior approval of the U.S. Department of State or appropriate export licensing authority. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and delete or destroy all copies of this e-mail message and/or any file attachment(s).

_______________________________________________
eLua-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/elua-dev

_______________________________________________
eLua-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/elua-dev

_______________________________________________
eLua-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/elua-dev

[BogdanM]

On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 8:21 PM, Tim michals <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Is it acceptable to use MPLAB has the build tool and use Microchip
> libraries?

If you can get past the Newlib limitation then yes. It would be the
first eLua target that builds only on Windows. An unfortunate novelty
but people seem to really want it.

Best,
Bogdan

>
> ________________________________
> From: Dado Sutter <[hidden email]>
> To: eLua Users and Development List (www.eluaproject.net)
> Sent: Mon, February 14, 2011 12:09:32 PM
> Subject: Re: [eLua-dev] PIC32 port status?
>
> Hello list,
>
> On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 15:52, Kevin Vermeer <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> And I'm interested as well!  I have a couple parts (PIC32MX795F512L) in
>> shipment, and am developing a board for them when I'm not at work or typing
>> this email.  I hope it wasn't my statement a few weeks back that I'd be
>> working on developing these that got this on the site,
>
> I'm afraid it was :)
>
>>
>> as it's likely to be at least mid-March before I get "Hello, World" loaded
>> on the board,
>
> which doesn't sound like too long to wait.
>
>>
>> and developing drivers for a few peripherals will take precedence over
>> getting eLua to work on it, so it's likely to be a couple months before I
>> start working on porting it to my board.
>
> Can't you use some ready libs for the peripherals and work only on the
> (easy) Lua binds ?
>
>>
>> What is everyone else using for development?  From Microchip, there's a
>> Starter Kit, USB Starter Kit, and an Ethernet (and USB) Starter Kit.   The
>> Explorer 16 has a compatible board, and there's also a Multimedia Expansion
>> board for the Starter Kits.  I'll be working on my own board, but I'll be
>> trying to make my modules as board-independent as possible, and hope to
>> benefit from (and provide benefit to) anyone using another tool.
>
> This is not a resume of our history or an official roadmap but we tend to be
> pretty busy on the next many months ahead, on some core features,
> refactoring, doc/site(s) and some other ports that gained priority for other
> strategic reasons.
> Still, we want and will do our best to help all the community initiatives
> for new platforms and modules ports.
>
> For the PIC32 initiative, I can offer and help to configure some of our
> online tools to help, like our tracker (I can create a "sprint" for the
> PIC32 port on Dashboard) and our wiki (we can have separate pages for it
> too).
> Of course the list will be always available for technical discussions too.
> Pls let me know if you need anything I can do now.
>
>> Kevin Vermeer
>
> Best
> Dado
>
>
>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 11:44 AM, King, Mike <[hidden email]>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> I’m also interested in the PIC32 port.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> From: [hidden email]
>>> [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Ivan Baggett
>>> Sent: Saturday, February 12, 2011 4:26 PM
>>> To: Bogdan Marinescu; eLua Users and Development List
>>> (www.eluaproject.net)
>>> Subject: [eLua-dev] PIC32 port status?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2/12/2011 4:07 PM, Bogdan Marinescu wrote:
>>>
>>> On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 10:38 PM, Ivan Baggett <[hidden email]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Just joined eLua list, is this thing on?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> We hear you loud and clean Ivan :) Welcome to the list!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>
>>> Bogdan
>>>
>>> Thank you.
>>>
>>> Since I'm new to the eLua list, let me state my main reason for being
>>> here is my interest in using eLua on the PIC32.  I do a lot of work with
>>> Microchip stuff, and while their older architectures don't have what it
>>> takes compared to the ARM chips, the PIC32 is a new deal, based on the MIPS
>>> 4K embedded core.  I'm not here to debate or advocate architectures,
>>> though.  My reason for using PIC32 was that about 2 years ago I started a
>>> design which would have been based on a Luminary Cortex-M3 part.  However,
>>> the no-stock and insane lead times that occurred forced me to cancel that
>>> design and use something else.  That something else was a PIC32.  I see on
>>> the eLua site that PIC32 is mentioned as a port in progress, but no
>>> details.  Can someone bring me up to speed on what has been done with the
>>> PIC32 port, and what remains to be done?  I'm willing to render assistance
>>> with tools procurement, but I've never ported eLua, so I have no idea what
>>> work is required to do that.
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>> Ivan Baggett
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any attachments,
>>> is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain information
>>> that is confidential or proprietary to K&L Microwave, Inc. Any unauthorized
>>> review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If this communication
>>> has been transmitted from a U.S. location it may also contain data subject
>>> to the International Traffic in Arms Regulations or U.S. Export
>>> Administration Regulations and, if so, cannot be disseminated, distributed
>>> or copied to foreign nationals, residing in the U.S. or abroad, without the
>>> prior approval of the U.S. Department of State or appropriate export
>>> licensing authority. If you have received this communication in error,
>>> please notify the sender by reply e-mail and delete or destroy all copies of
>>> this e-mail message and/or any file attachment(s).
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> eLua-dev mailing list
>>> [hidden email]
>>> https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/elua-dev
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> eLua-dev mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/elua-dev
>>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> eLua-dev mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/elua-dev
>
>

_______________________________________________
eLua-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/elua-dev

[Ivan Baggett]

FWIW, the new MPLAB X is built on Netbeans, and when you compile, you
can see Linux-like commands issued, such as "rm -f somefile.o".


On 2/14/2011 1:36 PM, Bogdan Marinescu wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 8:21 PM, Tim michals<[hidden email]>  wrote:
>> Is it acceptable to use MPLAB has the build tool and use Microchip
>> libraries?
> If you can get past the Newlib limitation then yes. It would be the
> first eLua target that builds only on Windows. An unfortunate novelty
> but people seem to really want it.
>
> Best,
> Bogdan
_______________________________________________
eLua-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/elua-dev

[Kevin Vermeer]

On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 1:21 PM, Tim michals <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Is it acceptable to use MPLAB has the build tool and use Microchip libraries?



I think that this is really three questions:

1. Is it acceptable to use the MPLAB IDE?
It's windows only, but otherwise a very nice IDE.  I prefer command line development to most IDEs, and I would really like this to be cross platform.  I wouldn't object if an MPLAB project file showed up in source control, though.
2. Is it acceptable to use the compiler tools available with MPLAB?
The versions without time limits that support optimization beyond level 0 are several thousands of dollars.  I have access to these versions through my employer, but I'm not sure about the legality of web builders or providing binaries on the website.
I don't think we should use the High Tech C Compiler, as it's not only expensive but also proprietary and would likely not play nice with the GCC code in eLua.  Plus, I don't have it.
3. Is it acceptable to us the Microchip libraries?
This is the biggest sticking point.  Bringing in these libraries causes a 64kB code size limitation unless you pay several thousand dollars.  We can't host these files in the source repository due to licensing.  Newlib (which eLua uses) is an option (there's no reason that these libraries need to be installed), and there have been several efforts with varying success to port Newlib to the PIC32.  I believe that the MSPGCC project has a version which is very close to what we want. 

The whole GCC/GPL debacle surrounding the PIC32 compiler is an interesting one.  Not only are there Microchip licensing problems, but you also have MIPS licensing to deal with, the optimizations, the GPL'ed compiler, the non-GPL optimizer, the alternative compiler, etc. etc. etc.   It's an interesting read.  Start at http://www.embeddedrelated.com/usenet/embedded/show/91196-1.php; there are other pages and discussions. Note the dates when you're reading; a lot has changed since these parts came out.

In my mind, a Newlib-based cross-platform environment which can be imported into MPLAB but requires no Microchip-hosted sources and license agreenments is best.
--
Kevin Vermeer

_______________________________________________
eLua-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/elua-dev

[Kevin Vermeer]

On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 3:19 PM, Ivan Baggett <[hidden email]> wrote:

FWIW, the new MPLAB X is built on Netbeans, and when you compile, you can see Linux-like commands issued, such as "rm -f somefile.o".

I think that they're using Cygwin under the hood on the Windows side, though I'm not sure where I read that.  This doesn't mean you can use it for free forever, though.  Apparently the use of the GCC (GPLed) compiler doesn't mean that, either. 

You can't get their header files without installing MPLAB and agreeing to their license restrictions. This makes it hard to build the compiler, and hard to distribute open-source projects for Microchip products.

_______________________________________________
eLua-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/elua-dev

[BogdanM]

> 1. Is it acceptable to use the MPLAB IDE?
> It's windows only, but otherwise a very nice IDE.  I prefer command line
> development to most IDEs, and I would really like this to be cross
> platform.  I wouldn't object if an MPLAB project file showed up in source
> control, though.

It's accetable to use whatever you want as far as I'm concerned.
However the current build system (scons-based) is quite dynamic; it
defines different macros based on its arguments and even does
different arrangements for different platforms. I'm not sure how easy
it would be to replicate this kind of functionality with an IDE unless
you forget the project-based approach and use it as an editor that
calls external tools to actually build the project. In any case I'd
really appreciate having also a way to build from the command line,
not only from the IDE.

> 2. Is it acceptable to use the compiler tools available with MPLAB?

We don't seem to have much choice at the moment.

> The versions without time limits that support optimization beyond level 0
> are several thousands of dollars.  I have access to these versions through
> my employer, but I'm not sure about the legality of web builders or
> providing binaries on the website.

I think you can safely provide binaries (a lot of open source projects
provide binaries built with commercial versions of Visual C, I don't
see why it would be different for Microchip). However I wouldn't like
to have code in the eLua repository that can only be compiled with a
commercial tool.

> I don't think we should use the High Tech C Compiler, as it's not only
> expensive but also proprietary and would likely not play nice with the GCC
> code in eLua.  Plus, I don't have it.

:) That's always a good reason ;)

> 3. Is it acceptable to us the Microchip libraries?

Once again, from what I could gather we don't have a real choice here.
We obviosuly can't include them in the project so we have to provide a
wa to include them in the link step as external libraries.

> This is the biggest sticking point.  Bringing in these libraries causes a
> 64kB code size limitation unless you pay several thousand dollars.  We can't
> host these files in the source repository due to licensing.  Newlib (which
> eLua uses) is an option (there's no reason that these libraries need to be
> installed), and there have been several efforts with varying success to port
> Newlib to the PIC32.  I believe that the MSPGCC project has a version which
> is very close to what we want.

How exactly would the MSP port help here? These are very different
architectures. Or are you interested only in the C side side of things
(like libc or libm) and not on the actual chip support libraries?

> The whole GCC/GPL debacle surrounding the PIC32 compiler is an interesting
> one.  Not only are there Microchip licensing problems, but you also have
> MIPS licensing to deal with, the optimizations, the GPL'ed compiler, the
> non-GPL optimizer, the alternative compiler, etc. etc. etc.   It's an
> interesting read.  Start at
> http://www.embeddedrelated.com/usenet/embedded/show/91196-1.php; there are
> other pages and discussions. Note the dates when you're reading; a lot has
> changed since these parts came out.
>
> In my mind, a Newlib-based cross-platform environment which can be imported
> into MPLAB but requires no Microchip-hosted sources and license agreenments
> is best.

If you have a Newlib-based environment I don't see a need for MPLAB in
the equation. Sure, it would be a good "nice-to-have" feature, but not
a must.

Best,
Bogdan
_______________________________________________
eLua-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/elua-dev

[BogdanM]

On a related note, I guess now would be a good time to make eLua
libc-independent :) Or in other words to make it contain its own libc
and whatever else is needed. It was a goal since the early days but
nobody found time to implement it until now.

Best,
Bogdan

On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 10:15 AM, Bogdan Marinescu
<[hidden email]> wrote:

>> 1. Is it acceptable to use the MPLAB IDE?
>> It's windows only, but otherwise a very nice IDE.  I prefer command line
>> development to most IDEs, and I would really like this to be cross
>> platform.  I wouldn't object if an MPLAB project file showed up in source
>> control, though.
>
> It's accetable to use whatever you want as far as I'm concerned.
> However the current build system (scons-based) is quite dynamic; it
> defines different macros based on its arguments and even does
> different arrangements for different platforms. I'm not sure how easy
> it would be to replicate this kind of functionality with an IDE unless
> you forget the project-based approach and use it as an editor that
> calls external tools to actually build the project. In any case I'd
> really appreciate having also a way to build from the command line,
> not only from the IDE.
>
>> 2. Is it acceptable to use the compiler tools available with MPLAB?
>
> We don't seem to have much choice at the moment.
>
>> The versions without time limits that support optimization beyond level 0
>> are several thousands of dollars.  I have access to these versions through
>> my employer, but I'm not sure about the legality of web builders or
>> providing binaries on the website.
>
> I think you can safely provide binaries (a lot of open source projects
> provide binaries built with commercial versions of Visual C, I don't
> see why it would be different for Microchip). However I wouldn't like
> to have code in the eLua repository that can only be compiled with a
> commercial tool.
>
>> I don't think we should use the High Tech C Compiler, as it's not only
>> expensive but also proprietary and would likely not play nice with the GCC
>> code in eLua.  Plus, I don't have it.
>
> :) That's always a good reason ;)
>
>> 3. Is it acceptable to us the Microchip libraries?
>
> Once again, from what I could gather we don't have a real choice here.
> We obviosuly can't include them in the project so we have to provide a
> wa to include them in the link step as external libraries.
>
>> This is the biggest sticking point.  Bringing in these libraries causes a
>> 64kB code size limitation unless you pay several thousand dollars.  We can't
>> host these files in the source repository due to licensing.  Newlib (which
>> eLua uses) is an option (there's no reason that these libraries need to be
>> installed), and there have been several efforts with varying success to port
>> Newlib to the PIC32.  I believe that the MSPGCC project has a version which
>> is very close to what we want.
>
> How exactly would the MSP port help here? These are very different
> architectures. Or are you interested only in the C side side of things
> (like libc or libm) and not on the actual chip support libraries?
>
>> The whole GCC/GPL debacle surrounding the PIC32 compiler is an interesting
>> one.  Not only are there Microchip licensing problems, but you also have
>> MIPS licensing to deal with, the optimizations, the GPL'ed compiler, the
>> non-GPL optimizer, the alternative compiler, etc. etc. etc.   It's an
>> interesting read.  Start at
>> http://www.embeddedrelated.com/usenet/embedded/show/91196-1.php; there are
>> other pages and discussions. Note the dates when you're reading; a lot has
>> changed since these parts came out.
>>
>> In my mind, a Newlib-based cross-platform environment which can be imported
>> into MPLAB but requires no Microchip-hosted sources and license agreenments
>> is best.
>
> If you have a Newlib-based environment I don't see a need for MPLAB in
> the equation. Sure, it would be a good "nice-to-have" feature, but not
> a must.
>
> Best,
> Bogdan
>

_______________________________________________
eLua-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/elua-dev

[King, Mike]

I realize I'm joining this conversation late but has anyone looked into using CodeSourcery's Sourcery G++ Lite Edition toolchain for the MIPS architecture?  Could this be a solution to the Microchip PIC32 licensing problem?

http://www.codesourcery.com/sgpp/lite/mips

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain information that is confidential or proprietary to K&L Microwave, Inc. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited.
If this communication has been transmitted from a U.S. location it may also contain data subject to the International Traffic in Arms Regulations or U.S. Export Administration Regulations and, if so, cannot be disseminated, distributed or copied to foreign nationals, residing in the U.S. or abroad, without the prior approval of the U.S. Department of State or appropriate export licensing authority. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and delete or destroy all copies of this e-mail message and/or any file attachment(s).

_______________________________________________
eLua-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/elua-dev

[Tim Michals]

This is the route I went down and here is what I found:

1. The include files for the processor, i.e. the register mapping.  According to the license agreement no files can be copied or modified. 
- Created a new register mapping include files using a simple address approach instead using linker adjust locations. One Include file has defines for each PIC32.  Used the data sheets etc. to get mappings and addresses.
- Since the Include file is changed, all peripheral library cannot be used.
- Also, Microchips GCC has special commands built in for Fuse Bits, how interrupts are mapped. The standard GCC doe support ISR mapping, but it is a little different.  So, worked on a simple ASM vector map file to help linker with the table.

2. Library startup, i.e. mapping flash speeds etc.

3. Flag bits in flash for setting up speed

4. New boot loader
  - There is a large chunk of flash space taken to support there jtag tools, since I'm not using these tools, no need to have support.  What I'm talking about is MIPS code to support a JTAG debugger.  There is code to help get registers etc.  This for Microchip is in Flash.
- The boot loader would only be in the first 12K. Then the 512K is up to the app..

Basically any code for USB, configuration of peripherals, is all new.

---

From: "King, Mike" <[hidden email]>
To: eLua Users and Development List (www.eluaproject.net)
Sent: Wed, February 23, 2011 10:14:23 AM
Subject: Re: [eLua-dev] PIC32 port status?

I realize I'm joining this conversation late but has anyone looked into using CodeSourcery's Sourcery G++ Lite Edition toolchain for the MIPS architecture?  Could this be a solution to the Microchip PIC32 licensing problem?

http://www.codesourcery.com/sgpp/lite/mips

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain information that is confidential or proprietary to K&L Microwave, Inc. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited.
If this communication has been transmitted from a U.S. location it may also contain data subject to the International Traffic in Arms Regulations or U.S. Export Administration Regulations and, if so, cannot be disseminated, distributed or copied to foreign nationals, residing in the U.S. or abroad, without the prior approval of the U.S. Department of State or appropriate export licensing authority. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and delete or destroy all copies of this e-mail message and/or any file attachment(s).

_______________________________________________
eLua-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/elua-dev

_______________________________________________
eLua-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/elua-dev

[Mike Panetta]

Why do people use silicon from such a sleazy company then?  It seems that Microchip is willfully violating the GPL if they have somehow time limited the optimization in GCC...  There are much more 'GPL friendly' cores in existence such as the Cortex-M3 from ARM that can be sourced from just about anywhere and have no such limitations in the compilers.

I am honestly surprised that the FSF has not gone after Microchip for this issue.  If/When they do, what is Microchip going to do, drop the limitations or drop the compiler?  If they drop the compiler (which is a possibility, esp if they decide that hitech is all they need to sell chips) then all the code that is written with 'gccisms' in it will need to be rewritten.  If I were a project manager and saw such a possibility in my products future (dead code due to the EOL of a compiler) I would jump ship to another chip ASAP.

I would personally be hesitant to work with a company that so flagrantly violates the GPL...

Also, even though you can 'externalize' the libs from microchip, would not the mixed licenses of the compiled code be in violation somewhere?  I am not sure what licenses the eLua code is under at the moment (I think at one point it was GPL/LGPL, is it now BSD?) but some of these licenses control how the binaries can be distributed in addition to the source.  Just linking the proprietary Microchip code with eLua could violate a license and make the binary itself undistributable...

Mike

On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 11:54 AM, Tim michals <[hidden email]> wrote:

This is the route I went down and here is what I found:

1. The include files for the processor, i.e. the register mapping.  According to the license agreement no files can be copied or modified. 
- Created a new register mapping include files using a simple address approach instead using linker adjust locations. One Include file has defines for each PIC32.  Used the data sheets etc. to get mappings and addresses.
- Since the Include file is changed, all peripheral library cannot be used.
- Also, Microchips GCC has special commands built in for Fuse Bits, how interrupts are mapped. The standard GCC doe support ISR mapping, but it is a little different.  So, worked on a simple ASM vector map file to help linker with the table.

2. Library startup, i.e. mapping flash speeds etc.

3. Flag bits in flash for setting up speed

4. New boot loader
  - There is a large chunk of flash space taken to support there jtag tools, since I'm not using these tools, no need to have support.  What I'm talking about is MIPS code to support a JTAG debugger.  There is code to help get registers etc.  This for Microchip is in Flash.
- The boot loader would only be in the first 12K. Then the 512K is up to the app..

Basically any code for USB, configuration of peripherals, is all new.

---

From: "King, Mike" <[hidden email]>

To: eLua Users and Development List (www.eluaproject.net)

Sent: Wed, February 23, 2011 10:14:23 AM

Subject: Re: [eLua-dev] PIC32 port status?

I realize I'm joining this conversation late but has anyone looked into using CodeSourcery's Sourcery G++ Lite Edition toolchain for the MIPS architecture?  Could this be a solution to the Microchip PIC32 licensing problem?

http://www.codesourcery.com/sgpp/lite/mips

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain information that is confidential or proprietary to K&L Microwave, Inc. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited.
If this communication has been transmitted from a U.S. location it may also contain data subject to the International Traffic in Arms Regulations or U.S. Export Administration Regulations and, if so, cannot be disseminated, distributed or copied to foreign nationals, residing in the U.S. or abroad, without the prior approval of the U.S. Department of State or appropriate export licensing authority. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and delete or destroy all copies of this e-mail message and/or any file attachment(s).

_______________________________________________
eLua-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/elua-dev

_______________________________________________
eLua-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/elua-dev

_______________________________________________
eLua-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/elua-dev

[jbsnyder]

On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 5:18 PM, Mike Panetta <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Why do people use silicon from such a sleazy company then?  It seems that
> Microchip is willfully violating the GPL if they have somehow time limited
> the optimization in GCC...  There are much more 'GPL friendly' cores in
> existence such as the Cortex-M3 from ARM that can be sourced from just about
> anywhere and have no such limitations in the compilers.

I don't think it's clear from those comments whether they're violating
the GPL or not.  It sounds like they're distributing some "secret
sauce" with their own version of the compiler, and depending on the
way that's done that could either be a violation or not.  For example,
CodeSourcery, the ARM maintainer for GCC has their own commercial
products with special headers, libraries, startup code (CS3), and
debug sprite that they distribute with special licenses.  They're
also, however, a much more welcome part of the community, since they
contribute a lot of patches to gcc, newlib, etc...

Clearly, however, Microchip is being less friendly.  One thing I've
never really understood is why a company would restrict copying of
header files containing register locations that they publish in
datasheets or manuals that are freely available.  Sure, I suppose it
is intellectual property, but I thought generally the goal of a
hardware maker was to get people to develop on one's hardware by any
means possible.  Arbitrary restrictions would seem to impede that,
especially when one wouldn't be restricted if one were to just
translate the documentation into new header files.

I'm certainly not going to discourage ports to new platforms, as long
as the quality of the port is generally good and all licenses involved
are complied with in the process.

> I am honestly surprised that the FSF has not gone after Microchip for this
> issue.  If/When they do, what is Microchip going to do, drop the limitations
> or drop the compiler?  If they drop the compiler (which is a possibility,
> esp if they decide that hitech is all they need to sell chips) then all the
> code that is written with 'gccisms' in it will need to be rewritten.  If I
> were a project manager and saw such a possibility in my products future
> (dead code due to the EOL of a compiler) I would jump ship to another chip
> ASAP.

This may have more to do with the reason for the strange restrictions
and limitations, but I don't expect we'll really know.

> I would personally be hesitant to work with a company that so flagrantly
> violates the GPL...
>
> Also, even though you can 'externalize' the libs from microchip, would not
> the mixed licenses of the compiled code be in violation somewhere?  I am not
> sure what licenses the eLua code is under at the moment (I think at one
> point it was GPL/LGPL, is it now BSD?) but some of these licenses control
> how the binaries can be distributed in addition to the source.  Just linking
> the proprietary Microchip code with eLua could violate a license and make
> the binary itself undistributable...

Most of eLua is MIT licensed now, like Lua itself.  There are various
exceptions to this for some libraries and other chunks of code we've
included along the way, but there shouldn't be any GPL code currently
in eLua.  A lot of the non-MIT licensed code is BSD license or
similar: http://www.eluaproject.net/en_overview.html#license

>
> Mike
>
> On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 11:54 AM, Tim michals <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> This is the route I went down and here is what I found:
>>
>> 1. The include files for the processor, i.e. the register mapping.
>> According to the license agreement no files can be copied or modified.
>> - Created a new register mapping include files using a simple address
>> approach instead using linker adjust locations. One Include file has defines
>> for each PIC32.  Used the data sheets etc. to get mappings and addresses.
>> - Since the Include file is changed, all peripheral library cannot be
>> used.
>> - Also, Microchips GCC has special commands built in for Fuse Bits, how
>> interrupts are mapped. The standard GCC doe support ISR mapping, but it is a
>> little different.  So, worked on a simple ASM vector map file to help linker
>> with the table.
>>
>> 2. Library startup, i.e. mapping flash speeds etc.
>>
>> 3. Flag bits in flash for setting up speed
>>
>> 4. New boot loader
>>   - There is a large chunk of flash space taken to support there jtag
>> tools, since I'm not using these tools, no need to have support.  What I'm
>> talking about is MIPS code to support a JTAG debugger.  There is code to
>> help get registers etc.  This for Microchip is in Flash.
>> - The boot loader would only be in the first 12K. Then the 512K is up to
>> the app..
>>
>> Basically any code for USB, configuration of peripherals, is all new.
>>
>> ________________________________
>> From: "King, Mike" <[hidden email]>
>> To: eLua Users and Development List (www.eluaproject.net)
>> Sent: Wed, February 23, 2011 10:14:23 AM
>> Subject: Re: [eLua-dev] PIC32 port status?
>>
>> I realize I'm joining this conversation late but has anyone looked into
>> using CodeSourcery's Sourcery G++ Lite Edition toolchain for the MIPS
>> architecture?  Could this be a solution to the Microchip PIC32 licensing
>> problem?
>>
>> http://www.codesourcery.com/sgpp/lite/mips
>>
>> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is
>> for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain information
>> that is confidential or proprietary to K&L Microwave, Inc. Any unauthorized
>> review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited.
>> If this communication has been transmitted from a U.S. location it may
>> also contain data subject to the International Traffic in Arms Regulations
>> or U.S. Export Administration Regulations and, if so, cannot be
>> disseminated, distributed or copied to foreign nationals, residing in the
>> U.S. or abroad, without the prior approval of the U.S. Department of State
>> or appropriate export licensing authority. If you have received this
>> communication in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and delete
>> or destroy all copies of this e-mail message and/or any file attachment(s).
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> eLua-dev mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/elua-dev
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> eLua-dev mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/elua-dev
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> eLua-dev mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/elua-dev
>
>

--
James Snyder
Biomedical Engineering
Northwestern University
[hidden email]
PGP: http://fanplastic.org/key.txt
Phone: [phone]
_______________________________________________
eLua-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/elua-dev

[Mike Panetta]

On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 8:13 PM, James Snyder <[hidden email]> wrote:

I don't think it's clear from those comments whether they're violating
the GPL or not.  It sounds like they're distributing some "secret
sauce" with their own version of the compiler, and depending on the
way that's done that could either be a violation or not.  For example,
CodeSourcery, the ARM maintainer for GCC has their own commercial
products with special headers, libraries, startup code (CS3), and
debug sprite that they distribute with special licenses.  They're
also, however, a much more welcome part of the community, since they
contribute a lot of patches to gcc, newlib, etc...

 

The biggest difference between what CodeSourcery is doing and what Microchip (seems to be?) doing is that CS is not limiting the maximum size of the executable or the optimization levels, both of which would be part of the compiler/linker which are GNU code.  The way CS makes the commercial version of the compiler more attractive is like you said, they add a debug sprite, and there is a level of integration with the IDE that you don't have in the free version.  No modifications are done to the base compiler, everything is outside of the compiler and is therefor clearly not a violation.
 

Clearly, however, Microchip is being less friendly.  One thing I've
never really understood is why a company would restrict copying of
header files containing register locations that they publish in
datasheets or manuals that are freely available.  Sure, I suppose it
is intellectual property, but I thought generally the goal of a
hardware maker was to get people to develop on one's hardware by any
means possible.  Arbitrary restrictions would seem to impede that,
especially when one wouldn't be restricted if one were to just
translate the documentation into new header files.

I never understood that myself...  Atmel has actually gone one step beyond (in the good direction) by distributing XML files that can be used to autogenerate headers for the chips (at least the AVR/AVR32 ones).  I wish more vendors would do this...

 

I'm certainly not going to discourage ports to new platforms, as long
as the quality of the port is generally good and all licenses involved
are complied with in the process.

Most of eLua is MIT licensed now, like Lua itself.  There are various
exceptions to this for some libraries and other chunks of code we've
included along the way, but there shouldn't be any GPL code currently
in eLua.  A lot of the non-MIT licensed code is BSD license or
similar: http://www.eluaproject.net/en_overview.html#license

Ahh, thanks for that update.  I could have looked myself, but clearly I was too lazy. ;)
 

--
James Snyder
Biomedical Engineering
Northwestern University
[hidden email]
PGP: http://fanplastic.org/key.txt
Phone: [phone]

Thanks,
Mike

_______________________________________________
eLua-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/elua-dev