Open source embedded C ; appropiate group?

Discussion in 'C Programming' started by may_2005@olley.com, Jun 1, 2005.

  1. Guest

    Hello,

    I am working on a piece of (open source) hardware, which needs a
    certain amount of (open source) embedded C code developed for the
    hardware to perform a useful task. I am looking for people to
    contribute to the writing of this software. It is not commercial in
    the sense that contributors will be paid for code written, but I expect
    to equally share the profits made from selling the hardware with the
    people who develop the software.

    Is comp.lang.c an appropriate group to post a more detailed explanation
    of the device and software required, as a result of which I may find
    people interested in contributing?

    Thank you.

    Paul.
    , Jun 1, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. bjrnove Guest

    Hi.

    I'm not shure if this group is the right place to post more
    information, but I could definitly be interested in a project like
    that.

    --
    bjrnove
    bjrnove, Jun 1, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. gooch Guest

    wrote:
    > Hello,
    >
    > I am working on a piece of (open source) hardware, which needs a
    > certain amount of (open source) embedded C code developed for the
    > hardware to perform a useful task. I am looking for people to
    > contribute to the writing of this software. It is not commercial in
    > the sense that contributors will be paid for code written, but I expect
    > to equally share the profits made from selling the hardware with the
    > people who develop the software.
    >
    > Is comp.lang.c an appropriate group to post a more detailed explanation
    > of the device and software required, as a result of which I may find
    > people interested in contributing?
    >
    > Thank you.
    >
    > Paul.


    I might be interested. Depends on the details of the project. Have you
    checked out a site like sourceforge.net?
    gooch, Jun 1, 2005
    #3
  4. wrote:
    > Hello,
    >
    > I am working on a piece of (open source) hardware, which needs a
    > certain amount of (open source) embedded C code developed for the
    > hardware to perform a useful task. I am looking for people to
    > contribute to the writing of this software. It is not commercial in
    > the sense that contributors will be paid for code written, but I expect
    > to equally share the profits made from selling the hardware with the
    > people who develop the software.
    >
    > Is comp.lang.c an appropriate group to post a more detailed explanation
    > of the device and software required, as a result of which I may find
    > people interested in contributing?


    Although some people here may be interested in the project, comp.lang.c
    is not the place to discuss this, check out sourceforge.net and
    freshmeat.net.

    Robert Gamble
    Robert Gamble, Jun 1, 2005
    #4
  5. On 1 Jun 2005 11:40:40 -0700,
    <> wrote:

    > Is comp.lang.c an appropriate group to post a more detailed explanation
    > of the device and software required, as a result of which I may find
    > people interested in contributing?


    No, it is not an appropriate group (comp.lang.c is for discussing the C
    language as defined in the standard). Try comp.programming?

    (I'd love to see the "open source" for your hardware, though, it's a
    fascinating concept <g>...)

    Chris C
    Chris Croughton, Jun 1, 2005
    #5
  6. Paul Olley Guest

    Many thanks for your feedback.

    I will take a look at sourceforge.net and freshmeat.net

    Paul.
    Paul Olley, Jun 1, 2005
    #6
  7. Chris Croughton wrote:
    > On 1 Jun 2005 11:40:40 -0700,
    > <> wrote:
    >
    > > Is comp.lang.c an appropriate group to post a more detailed explanation
    > > of the device and software required, as a result of which I may find
    > > people interested in contributing?

    >
    > No, it is not an appropriate group (comp.lang.c is for discussing the C
    > language as defined in the standard). Try comp.programming?
    >
    > (I'd love to see the "open source" for your hardware, though, it's a
    > fascinating concept <g>...)


    "open source hardware" usually refers to hardware whose interface
    specifications and the information needed to make full use of the
    hardware is available to the public as opposed to proprietary hardware
    where you either need to purchase access to such information or reverse
    engineer existing software that utilizes the hardware.

    Robert Gamble
    Robert Gamble, Jun 1, 2005
    #7
  8. Dan Henry Guest

    wrote:

    >Hello,
    >
    >I am working on a piece of (open source) hardware, which needs a
    >certain amount of (open source) embedded C code developed ...
    >
    >Is comp.lang.c an appropriate group to post ... ?


    No. Post in comp.arch.embedded.

    --
    Dan Henry
    Dan Henry, Jun 2, 2005
    #8
  9. Chris Croughton wrote on 01/06/05 :
    > (I'd love to see the "open source" for your hardware, though, it's a
    > fascinating concept <g>...)


    Could be Open Source VHDL ... IP's blocks are so expensive...

    --
    Emmanuel
    The C-FAQ: http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/faq.html
    The C-library: http://www.dinkumware.com/refxc.html

    "There are 10 types of people in the world today;
    those that understand binary, and those that dont."
    Emmanuel Delahaye, Jun 2, 2005
    #9
  10. Paul Olley Guest

    "Emmanuel Delahaye" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Chris Croughton wrote on 01/06/05 :
    >> (I'd love to see the "open source" for your hardware, though, it's a
    >> fascinating concept <g>...)

    >
    > Could be Open Source VHDL ... IP's blocks are so expensive...


    In my case I intend to make "all" the hardware design openly available.
    This includes the cirucit diagram, PCB layout, and the programmable logic
    device source code.

    Paul.
    Paul Olley, Jun 2, 2005
    #10
  11. On Thu, 02 Jun 2005 11:25:38 GMT, Paul Olley
    <> wrote:

    > "Emmanuel Delahaye" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> Chris Croughton wrote on 01/06/05 :
    >>> (I'd love to see the "open source" for your hardware, though, it's a
    >>> fascinating concept <g>...)

    >>
    >> Could be Open Source VHDL ... IP's blocks are so expensive...

    >
    > In my case I intend to make "all" the hardware design openly available.
    > This includes the cirucit diagram, PCB layout, and the programmable logic
    > device source code.


    OK, I'd call that "open source" <g>. I'm impressed...

    (Possibly on-topic for comp.arch.embedded?)

    Chris C
    Chris Croughton, Jun 3, 2005
    #11
  12. CBFalconer Guest

    Paul Olley wrote:
    >

    .... snip ...
    >
    > In my case I intend to make "all" the hardware design openly
    > available. This includes the cirucit diagram, PCB layout, and
    > the programmable logic device source code.


    20 or 25 years ago virtually ALL hardware came that way.

    --
    "I conclude that there are two ways of constructing a software
    design: One way is to make it so simple that there are obviously
    no deficiencies and the other way is to make it so complicated
    that there are no obvious deficiencies." -- C. A. R. Hoare
    CBFalconer, Jun 3, 2005
    #12
  13. On Fri, 03 Jun 2005 22:22:50 GMT, CBFalconer
    <> wrote:

    > Paul Olley wrote:
    >>

    > ... snip ...
    >>
    >> In my case I intend to make "all" the hardware design openly
    >> available. This includes the cirucit diagram, PCB layout, and
    >> the programmable logic device source code.

    >
    > 20 or 25 years ago virtually ALL hardware came that way.


    1980-85? Er, no, there were still a number of prominent manufacturers
    who went as far as to relabel chips on their boards so that it couldn't
    be determined what they were (DEC (or were they calling themselves
    'Digital' by then?) for instance). I don't remember any major computer
    manufacturer who made their detailed hardware designs accessible until
    IBM did it with the PC (which led to the 'clones' and price wars -- and
    to the success of that platform, eventually). Many wouldn't even
    publish the interfaces. I don't think I've come across any major
    hardware manufacturer in the last 25+ years which published the source
    for its programmable logic devices.

    Chris C
    Chris Croughton, Jun 4, 2005
    #13
  14. Joe Wright Guest

    Chris Croughton wrote:
    > On Fri, 03 Jun 2005 22:22:50 GMT, CBFalconer
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >
    >>Paul Olley wrote:
    >>
    >>... snip ...
    >>
    >>>In my case I intend to make "all" the hardware design openly
    >>>available. This includes the cirucit diagram, PCB layout, and
    >>>the programmable logic device source code.

    >>
    >>20 or 25 years ago virtually ALL hardware came that way.

    >
    >
    > 1980-85? Er, no, there were still a number of prominent manufacturers
    > who went as far as to relabel chips on their boards so that it couldn't
    > be determined what they were (DEC (or were they calling themselves
    > 'Digital' by then?) for instance). I don't remember any major computer
    > manufacturer who made their detailed hardware designs accessible until
    > IBM did it with the PC (which led to the 'clones' and price wars -- and
    > to the success of that platform, eventually). Many wouldn't even
    > publish the interfaces. I don't think I've come across any major
    > hardware manufacturer in the last 25+ years which published the source
    > for its programmable logic devices.
    >
    > Chris C


    I think Chuck is right. I got into this stuff in 1980 and bought an
    S-100 system from California Computer Systems and an Intellec II from
    Intel Corp. Both machines were completely documented to the board layout
    and circuit schematic level. Both CCS and Intel provided source code
    listings of the BIOS.

    Some time later, I wrote the BIOS and system utilities for the Ampro
    Little Board. Full docs, layout, schematic and source code was included
    with each machine. The Micromint SBC: same thing.

    --
    Joe Wright mailto:
    "Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler."
    --- Albert Einstein ---
    Joe Wright, Jun 4, 2005
    #14
  15. CBFalconer Guest

    Chris Croughton wrote:
    > CBFalconer <> wrote:
    >> Paul Olley wrote:
    >>>

    >> ... snip ...
    >>>
    >>> In my case I intend to make "all" the hardware design openly
    >>> available. This includes the cirucit diagram, PCB layout, and
    >>> the programmable logic device source code.

    >>
    >> 20 or 25 years ago virtually ALL hardware came that way.

    >
    > 1980-85? Er, no, there were still a number of prominent
    > manufacturers who went as far as to relabel chips on their boards
    > so that it couldn't be determined what they were (DEC (or were
    > they calling themselves 'Digital' by then?) for instance). I
    > don't remember any major computer manufacturer who made their
    > detailed hardware designs accessible until IBM did it with the
    > PC (which led to the 'clones' and price wars -- and to the
    > success of that platform, eventually). Many wouldn't even
    > publish the interfaces. I don't think I've come across any major
    > hardware manufacturer in the last 25+ years which published the
    > source for its programmable logic devices.


    IBM simply followed industry practice at the time. There was no
    problem getting schematics, bioses, etc. for S100 systems,
    Kaypros, Osbornes, even if you limit it to personal computers.
    Things were usually available in the instrumentation field also. I
    could refuse to buy things that didn't come with proper
    documentation, so that we could handle service and/or modification
    in house. The usual Tek scope had full schematics available,
    although many parts were not available on the general market.

    I recall getting the firmware for a 6502 based Teleray terminal. I
    modified it for some convenient reason, installed the result in all
    our terminals, and everybody was happy.

    --
    "If you want to post a followup via groups.google.com, don't use
    the broken "Reply" link at the bottom of the article. Click on
    "show options" at the top of the article, then click on the
    "Reply" at the bottom of the article headers." - Keith Thompson
    CBFalconer, Jun 4, 2005
    #15
  16. On Sat, 04 Jun 2005 14:58:02 GMT, CBFalconer
    <> wrote:

    > Chris Croughton wrote:
    >> CBFalconer <> wrote:
    >>> Paul Olley wrote:
    >>>>
    >>> ... snip ...
    >>>>
    >>>> In my case I intend to make "all" the hardware design openly
    >>>> available. This includes the cirucit diagram, PCB layout, and
    >>>> the programmable logic device source code.
    >>>
    >>> 20 or 25 years ago virtually ALL hardware came that way.

    >>
    >> 1980-85? Er, no, there were still a number of prominent
    >> manufacturers who went as far as to relabel chips on their boards
    >> so that it couldn't be determined what they were (DEC (or were
    >> they calling themselves 'Digital' by then?) for instance). I
    >> don't remember any major computer manufacturer who made their
    >> detailed hardware designs accessible until IBM did it with the
    >> PC (which led to the 'clones' and price wars -- and to the
    >> success of that platform, eventually). Many wouldn't even
    >> publish the interfaces. I don't think I've come across any major
    >> hardware manufacturer in the last 25+ years which published the
    >> source for its programmable logic devices.

    >
    > IBM simply followed industry practice at the time. There was no
    > problem getting schematics, bioses, etc. for S100 systems,
    > Kaypros, Osbornes, even if you limit it to personal computers.


    If you limit it to personal and 'hobbyist' computers, it was indeed
    available. For commercial computers, however, it was a different story,
    a number of manufacturers were still trying to block 3rd-party addons.

    And not all personal computers published specifications -- Apple, for
    instance, were always cagy about such things and although there were
    plenty of people 'disassembling' both hardware and software it was
    generally against the terms and conditions (although not illegal, at
    least in Europe).

    > Things were usually available in the instrumentation field also. I
    > could refuse to buy things that didn't come with proper
    > documentation, so that we could handle service and/or modification
    > in house. The usual Tek scope had full schematics available,
    > although many parts were not available on the general market.


    I take it you didn't touch HP instrumentation, then. That, like DEC
    kit, was designed to only be "field servicable" in the sense that a
    technician would swap PCBs and send the possibly faulty ones back to the
    lab for checking.

    > I recall getting the firmware for a 6502 based Teleray terminal. I
    > modified it for some convenient reason, installed the result in all
    > our terminals, and everybody was happy.


    I had (possibly still have somewhere) firmware for several terminals, but
    it wasn't published (copied and disassembled, probably against the terms
    of purchase).

    It certainly wasn't "virtually all hardware".

    Chris C
    Chris Croughton, Jun 5, 2005
    #16
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Colin Paul Gloster
    Replies:
    48
    Views:
    1,840
    Colin Paul Gloster
    Apr 10, 2007
  2. arnuld
    Replies:
    19
    Views:
    1,093
    Maxim Yegorushkin
    Oct 10, 2009
  3. pat eyler
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    435
    Masayoshi Takahashi
    Mar 5, 2005
  4. Iñaki Baz Castillo

    Looking for an appropiate parser generator

    Iñaki Baz Castillo, Mar 15, 2008, in forum: Ruby
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    157
    ThoML
    Mar 17, 2008
  5. Iñaki Baz Castillo
    Replies:
    10
    Views:
    172
    Michal Suchanek
    Jan 26, 2009
Loading...

Share This Page