Tool for Spin on Linux?
prof_braino
Posts: 4,313
in Propeller 1
OK, the forums changed and I'm lost again. And I a fresh install of linux, and need to re-install all my tools again.
Where do I find the tool for SPIN on linux?
I did a search from learn.parallax.com for "spin and linux" and found propeller GCC http://learn.parallax.com/C/propeller-gcc-beta
A search using just "linux" found simple IDE, but that looks to be only C. http://learn.parallax.com/propeller-c-set-simpleide/linux
Didn't that used to handle spin, but spin ability was removed? Or can it still be used for spin? ?
Searching on google for "propeller spin linux" finds propeller IDE on github: https://github.com/parallaxinc/PropellerIDE
But this is build 0.30, so we can expect this to be a development version, and might not have all features fully functional.
And I now recall openspin also on github https://github.com/parallaxinc/OpenSpin
But there is only a windows version of this, this looks like it hasn't been updated in a couple years.
What's the current recommended best method for getting a spin program onto a prop from linux? Is it still propeller IDE 0.30?
Thanks!
Where do I find the tool for SPIN on linux?
I did a search from learn.parallax.com for "spin and linux" and found propeller GCC http://learn.parallax.com/C/propeller-gcc-beta
A search using just "linux" found simple IDE, but that looks to be only C. http://learn.parallax.com/propeller-c-set-simpleide/linux
Didn't that used to handle spin, but spin ability was removed? Or can it still be used for spin? ?
Searching on google for "propeller spin linux" finds propeller IDE on github: https://github.com/parallaxinc/PropellerIDE
But this is build 0.30, so we can expect this to be a development version, and might not have all features fully functional.
And I now recall openspin also on github https://github.com/parallaxinc/OpenSpin
But there is only a windows version of this, this looks like it hasn't been updated in a couple years.
What's the current recommended best method for getting a spin program onto a prop from linux? Is it still propeller IDE 0.30?
Thanks!
Comments
Checkout https://github.com/ZiCog/pi-propeller-load and build that. Never mind that it says "pi-propell...." as simple make command should build it on a PC linux.
There we go. You have a Spin tool chain.
Grab a copy of the spin syntax highlighting rules for vim and you have a nice editor. http://forums.parallax.com/discussion/118328/spin-syntax-definition-for-vim/p1
I don't know what has happened here. There was such a surge of progress with prop-gcc, openspin, SimpleIDE and PropellerIDE but now it looks like the available packages are old and or broken, everyone is having trouble installing and using them. Everything has gone down the toilet.
The PropellerIDE .deb *SHOULD* install on any debian based Linux. I need to grab a Ubuntu and Mint and ??? to try them in a VM and see if they do work.
Sadly, if you chose a RedHat derived Linux for some reason, you need to build everythign from source - I outlined the steps in the BST thread. After going through all the steps, I still do not have a working PropellerIDE tool chain.
As for finding tools, I always have to hunt around. The Propeller Tool is under Support|Downloads but no mention of the other tools here. None of the Propeller boards have tools listed under "Downloads & Documentation" or "Additional Resources" - I would think that you would want people to find the tools to products as easily as possible, not hide them or not mention them at all (?) as far as the open sourced tools.
I really don't understand the layout of much of the Parallax.com website anymore as far as attracting and helping new users.
I would add vanilla Debian in there too. Good way to point out required dependencies that may have been taken for granted on Ubuntu or Mint.
debs and the packages system are all about resolving dependencies as such the packages required to satisfy the dependencies of whatever it is you want to install may or may not be available on you OS or the versions of libraries and things they provide may be different enough to cause trouble.
A couple of times I have installed foreign packages into a Debian system and they have totally hosed it immediately or messed up the installation enough that it could not be upgraded anymore!
I just don't like to do that anymore. If something I want is not in the debian repos I'd rather it was offered as a tarball that could be unpacked into /opt or someplace.
Edit: Of course sometimes a given .deb will work on many distros and not cause any harm. That's fine but it does lead one into falsely believing this is always without risk.
Hard to argue that! I'll take a tarball over a debian any day. But, oddly enough, when I first switched to Linux years ago, from Windows, it took me a long time to understand such a simple concept. I remember downloading Firefox as a tarball, extracting it, and being completely baffled. There was no icon on the executable and it didn't show up in my menu. I assumed something was broken. Seems silly now, but those two little things kept me from using tarball packages for years as I was learning about what "installing" really meant. I completely understand why other linux users might prefer a .deb or .rpm.
Of course the convenience of apt-get or yum existed for like what seems... for ever, it is just now that MS seems to see the light (I mean with the "App(lication) Store", but just not quite....
Having an application program all in it's own directory without getting entwined in the OS is great. I have many programs like that on Linux systems: node.js, io.jsm Emscripten, prop-gcc, SimpleIDE etc etc.
The problem is that those apps may well not work with whatever library versions are on your system, or they may break when your systems libraries get up dated. So then you start wanting to keep copies of the libraries the app needs in that app directory as well. But then you don't get all the bug fixes of the new libs or worse, security fixes.
So, it's kind of nice when an app is in the operating systems repositories and maintained in a working condition for you by the OS maintainers.
But that means you are always far behind the latest developments of whatever app because the OS maintainers like stability over new shiny things. That is if the app is in the OS repos at all like Simple IDE say.
So then the makers of apps like Simple IDE decide to make easy to install OS packages, .debs, or whatever. This can be a disaster sometimes.
From a security perspective why should I have to run code from Parallax, or anyone else, with root permissions on my machine just to install their application. That is simply nuts!
I'm not implying I don't trust Parallax but things go wrong and I worry when I see people fetch .debs from all over the place and installing them.
So, after that ramble, my conclusion is that this whole app distribution/installation thing is still an unsolved problem of computer science!
Autocontained application, its own libraries, its own files all in 1 subdirectory that you put where you want it. Do you need a runtime thingy ? it should only be for you in your own directory !. Shared libraries are good, maybe there were good as harddisks were small, I don't care anymore if each program has it own copy of the same 5 MBytes so, dylib, dll or whatever it is.You get per app your own PATH, LD_LIBRARY_PATH and so on anyways... than take advantage of that for Pit's sake !.
Take this nice example:
I use icarus verilog, it is great but... there is a gotcha !, some other program uses cygwin too and if I installit after iverilog... iverilog does't work anymore... solution ? MODIFY the PATH for iverilog so the first entry is its bin directory... how broken is that !? (no idea what I installed AFTER iverilog that breaks it
The resources are there... they are just not being used correctly. Of course it is MS fault that programs do not get configured correctly, you have to make a shell script to correct that problem... because you cannot set a PATH with that bloody lnk file !.
/rant