I want to write an application for an embedded platform that currently runs c95. Is open62541 backward compatible with c95 ?
I am currently looking to work on an opc ua enabled hardware device and wanted to get some info before choosing to use open62541 for development.
If you read the main page it clearly states "Written in C99 with architecture-specific plugins (POSIX, ...)" -> https://open62541.org/
Related
Straight question about WebRTC compilation on Windows (GN/Ninja): Is there a specific configuration in GN that tells ninja to build WebRTC into DLLs that can be consumed by a MSVC application? Currently I just build them statically, but this is not good because I am using a legacy application that should consume WebRTC in dynamic link only. Looking into WebRTC build list (in gn) it seems there is no such configuration. Is that statement correct? If not, what would be the option to be used?
I'm studying the javax.smartcardio classes. I'm using eclipse 3.6 and I have JDK 6 SE. I can use the statement import javax.smartcardio.* or any of its individual classes, as long as I change preferences to warn or ignore forbidden references.
I don't see any mention of javax.smartcardio in the standard documentation at Java SE 6
and no javadoc help pops up in eclipse. I have found docs here.
Is there a way of linking Eclipse to the javadocs for smartcardio?
I found a WebLog about it (Konstantin Flitschew WebLog (german)). It's in german but it worked for me, so I give a short translation here:
create a java project or open an existing project
right-click the project and open the properties dialog
select build path -> libraries tab and unfold the "JRE System Library" tree
select the entry "Access Rules" and push the "edit" button on the right
you can apply a rule with the "add" button: set the drop down to "accessible" and enter the value “javax/smartcardio/**”
With this setting I was able to access the classes of javax.smartcardio.
I've asked Sun back in the day multiple times to include the javax.smartcardio in the documentation, but they have refused all the times. Now it seems that 64 bit Java version 6/7 for Windows do not have javax.smartcardio, and that the access rules rule out using it directly. This is pretty strange as javax.smartcardio seems to be an accepted JSR.
Sun and Oracle don't really communicate well regarding security API's. They are relatively well designed, but the support is lacking, and they do introduce features out of the blue.
[EDIT]
Although the javax.smartcardio package is an accepted JSR, the umbrella JSR's for Java 6 and 7 SE don't include it. See java_se-fr-spec.zip for more information (see below). So javacardx.smartcardio it is not part of the Java SE standard API. Nowadays you may have trouble accessing the API even if it is present. And you cannot add your own as it may be present for a particular edition. You can use Eclipse access rules to enable javax.smartcardio and remove access violations from your "Problem view".
Java 8 from Oracle does include an javax.smartcardio implementation. You may still have to configure access to it.
JSR 268, the Java Smart-Card I/O API, will not be included because the
JSR 270 Expert Group concluded that it would not be of sufficiently
wide interest in the Java SE 6 time frame.
Oracle's JDK does not contain the javadoc for javax.smartcardio at all. Use OpenJDK instead.
Install OpenJDK from https://adoptopenjdk.net/, then add it in Eclipse using Window -> Preferences -> Java -> Installed JREs (in Windows the path you need looks like C:\Program Files\AdoptOpenJDK\jdk-8.0.242.08-hotspot). The result:
I was in the same situation as you were but then I found this http://intelligenzija.net/?q=node/1
Basically you need to set Access rules for these classes in the IDE so you can use them.
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
Questions asking us to recommend or find a tool, library or favorite off-site resource are off-topic for Stack Overflow as they tend to attract opinionated answers and spam. Instead, describe the problem and what has been done so far to solve it.
Closed 9 years ago.
Improve this question
I have purchased a Tiva C series LaunchPad TM4C123G Evaluation Kit from Texas Instruments. This kit contains a small PCB with an ARM Cortex M4F microcontroller. Now I want to start writing software for this microcontroller. I am used to program AVR 8-bit microcontrollers using AVR Studio on Windows. I heard that it shoud be easy to program ARM-based microcontrollers on Linux, and since Linux is my main platform, I would like a simple IDE that will work more or less like I am used to from AVR.
For several days I have been searching for a good IDE and tools that will do the job. To my surprise, only a few will run on Linux, and none is open source or freeware. Can this really be true? I do not want to spend several hundred dollars just to try out some programming for the Cortex M4F. Nor do I want to learn one IDE now and then another later when I found out it is not good enough or too expensive. I am used to Linux and the open source way of doing things and I am very shocked that nobody seem to be doing any serious embedded ARM programming with open source tools on Linux. Please correct me if I am wrong.
I have no plans running Linux on the Cortex M4F - I just want to program it like a normal microcontroller.
Texas Instruments recommends one of the following tool chains on the back cover of the evaluation kit:
Code Composer Studio IDE: full functional board locked
Keil: 32KB address limited
IAR: 32KB address limited
Mentor Embedded Sourcery CodeBench: 30-day full functional
I have also been recommended Red Studio from code_red.
Neither is open source or free and all have limitations. It seems to me that only Code Composer Studio and Red Studio is Linux compatible.
I stumbled upon yet another product, Rowley CrossWorks, which is also Linux compatible but still very commercial and expensive.
Is it really true that there is no open source alternative? Most of the products seem to use Eclipse and GCC, which one should be able to do without these commercial packages, right? I just can't find any tutorial or guide explaining how to do set this up for embedded ARM programming. Also I need to know how to program the device after compiling.
I really want to get started soon. Any advice and ideas are very appreciated :-)
It's always the same, no matter which eval board you have: STM32 discovery, LPCXpresso, TI Launchpads. They are very cheap, but the recommended IDEs are limited: Their code size is limited, Windows only, or they are bound to a specific Linux distribution.
In my experience the choice depends on your long-term goals:
Do you want to share code with AVR 8-bit (or PIC32, Renesas RX 32, ...)?
Is it a mid-term/long-term goal to have a build system based on make?
Do you need tab-completion and/or an integrated debugger?
Do you want to try other eval boards in the future (without being forced to install yet another IDE)?
or do you just want to get this one up and running quickly. In that case I would use one of the recommended IDEs to get an impression.
On the other hand, all 32-bit microcontrollers I have used (Cortex-M0/3/4, PIC32, Renesas RX) can be programmed with gcc. As far as I know Code Red, Mentor, and MPLABX use gcc (or a modified gcc).
So there is always the possibility to use Eclipse with a Makefile project, and gcc.
I have tried it twice, but it did not work well for me, because I share libraries between the different targets, and I found it difficult to pass around the defines in Eclipse.
So my IDE is Makefile, Emacs, and gcc, and I have switched completely to using C++: This might be another advantage of using gcc.
Both possibilities (Eclipse with Makefile project or just editor with make) are not "off the shelf": They require time, patience, and your favourite Internet search engine.
Update
I am not aware of a complete tutorial on how to setup a GCC + make based environment, so I simply describe the basic steps I did it some years ago (with some changes).
Get a binary distribution of GCC for ARM from https://launchpad.net/gcc-arm-embedded
The following steps are STM32 specific:
Get one of the discovery boards, for example the STM32 value line Discovery.
Get a flash utility: I am using stlink (git clone https://github.com/texane/stlink.git). This includes a GDB backend as well.
There are various examples available, search for "stm32vl discovery blink" (I cannot recommend one here, the one I used has vanished)
As an alternative (or follow-up): Get the Peripheral firmware examples
You will find a GNU ld compatible linker script in Project/Examples/GPIOToggle/TrueSTUDIO/stm32_flash.ld
You will find a GNU as compatible startup in Libraries/CMSIS/CM3/DeviceSupport/ST/STM32F10x/startup/TrueSTUDIO/startup_stm32f10x_ld_vl.s
You will find all other required library include files and sources in the .zip archive as well
Look at the GPIOToggle project (Project/Examples/GPIOToggle)
Write a Makefile to compile, link, and flash
To build your own development environment you could use the following combination:
Eclipse CDT
Get the toolchain to be used (official GCC version or some third-party customized for your platform)
Integrate the toolchain into Eclipse environment either through the internal Eclipse build system (CDT builder) or through some external builder (i.e. make)
In order to have JTAG debugging support, there is a GDB Hardware Debugging Eclipse plug-in you will need to setup
I've managed to complete my own setup in such a way for LPC1769 (Cortex-M3 CPU) and it worked :)
This is a question related to Get OS-Version in WinRT Metro App C# but not its duplicate.
Is there any option to detect from a Metro application whether there is the desktop feature available on the system? I understand that detection of the OS version is not supported and that is OK imo.
However my metro app needs to know whether there is a Desktop available on the system it is running on.
By Desktop I mean extendable desktop - desktop, where 3rd party desktop applications can be installed. As we know ARM based units will have the desktop too, but only with Microsoft built-in programs.
Can I distinguish whether my Metro app is running on a ARM based tablet with non-extendable desktop vs on all other (Intel based) devices with extendable desktop?
After some more extensive search I found GetNativeSystemInfo method. The hint was right away on SO site - this question. This approach seems to be fully supported by Windows Store applications - the App Cert Kit test ran smoothly despite the fact that pinvoke was used.
I ended up with the following code:
[DllImport("kernel32.dll")]
internal static extern void GetNativeSystemInfo(ref SystemInfo lpSystemInfo);
internal static bool IsArmBased()
{
var sysInfo = new SystemInfo();
GetNativeSystemInfo(ref sysInfo);
return sysInfo.wProcessorArchitecture == ProcessorArchitectureArm; //ushort 5
}
This seems to be as a solution I was looking for. Please tell me if not or make me aware of whatever problems connected to such an approach. Thank you.
If this is HTML, you can use window.cpuClass to get if it's ARM, x86 or amd64.
A non dynamic version is to use target specific architectures rather than AnyCPU, and then use the flavours with #ifdefs to hard code it at build time. You have to submit 3 packages to the store, however.
Use a try {} catch(){} to access those libraries, if anything goes wrong assume the ARM version.
I have a plan to build a web-site which running CGI made with Cocoa.
My final goal is develop on Mac OS X, and run on FreeBSD.
Is this possible?
As I know, there is a free implementation of some NextStep classes, the GNUStep.
The web-site is almost built with only strings. I read GNUStep documents, classes are enough. DB connection will be made with C interfaces.
Most biggest problem which I'm concerning is linking and binary compatibility. I'm currently configuring FreeBSD on VirtualBox, but I wanna know any possibility informations about this from experts.
This is not a production server. Just a trial. Please feel free to saying anything.
--edit--
I confused Foundation and Cocoa frameworks. What I said was Foundation. Basic classes which just enough to manipulating strings.
It’s entirely possible to cross-develop using Xcode. The Cocotron does this – and provides an implementation of Foundation – but doesn’t currently target FreeBSD. You could probably use it as a template to set up cross-development for BSD targets using GNUstep, but it won’t be easy.
You should be OK with the GNUstep Foundation on FreeBSD 9.0 with Objective-C 2 (clang). See these instructions.
Note: Do not installing under '/' with a FreeBSD default install, because it has little space on the '/' partition. I've used /usr/local/gnustep instead, and made some links as the instructions suggest.
Note II: GNUstep sources from subversion repository didn't compile for me, so I used the latest stable GNUstep sources.
Yes, you can do this, and I am doing it right now successfully using FreeBSD 8.2 and Xcode 4.0, running the Foundation class from The Cocotron. Here is a link: describing exactly what I did to build the cross compiler and set everything up. I also detail in that post, how I attempted to get AppKit (GUI) to work. I failed, it may work in the future, it doesn't fully work yet.
So far it's great. I use a common codebase to write iPhone App (game client) and FreeBSD Game Server; after my server compiles I even have a target rsync the files to my dev box.
One more note, you mention DB, I'm successfully using mysqlclient libraries within my App and my post details how to do that. Since you're building a cross-compiler with The Cocotron you can use any library. Just install the library on FreeBSD first, then create the platform as described.
Sounds like your trying to shoehorn tools onto OS and hardware they were not designed for. There are hacks to get almost anything running on top of anything else but why ask for all the grief?
The entire point of the entire Apple API is that you have integration from hardware to OS to development tools. You supposed to pay more up front in return for greater robustness and lower over all lifecycle cost. (It doesn't always work just like Linux doesn't always save money and Windows doesn't always provide the software choices you need but that is the design goal.) When you break Apple's hardware-OS-Dev trinity you have to start fighting the API and the hardware instead of letting it work for you.
I don't think what you're doing will work and even if it does it will cost a lot of time and in the end time is money. Unless your being forced by external circumstances beyond your control to use this configuration, I would strongly suggest you do whatever it takes to find another way to accomplish what you want.
You won't get binary compatibility. Mac OS X uses the Mach-O object format and FreeBSD uses ELF, like linux. Cocoa won't work on platforms other than Mac OS, but if you stick to POSIX and open-source libraries though, you shouldn't have too much trouble building your CGI (and any dependencies) on your FreeBSD machine.
Also, Cocoa for a website? It's the Mac OS standard library for GUIs, associated datastructures, and various helpers. Apple used to promote something called WebObjects which was similar to Cocoa for the web, but I haven't heard anything about it in ages. I don't think Cocoa will work for a website, unless you just mean write a custom web server that has a graphical front-end in Cocoa.