Xilinx 6.2i ISE WebPACK running under wine?

A

andre

Guest
I have 5.1 ISE WebPACK running under wine but just discivered it doesn't
support Spartan3. From the archives I read about some difficulties
regarding 6.2 ISE running on wine, have these been solved?

http://www.fpga-faq.com/archives/70825.html

I urgently need to know if 6.2 ISE works under wine as I have just
ordered the $99 Spartan-3 Starter Kit. If not I shall need to cancel my
order.

For those who haven't seen the Spartan 3 Kit:

http://www.xilinx.com/products/spartan3/s3boards.htm

Looks like a superb bit of kit, I will be buying a number of these for
my University module. Having the RAM on board is great. The applications
I have already thought about - add an ADC and you have a digital storage
scope, Turbo decoder, LDPC codes and so on. We'll need to get the ISE
6.2 WebPACK running on Linux and write our own programmer software. Does
anyone know of any Linux JTAG programming software suitable for the
Spartan? Or details of the protocol for programming the FPGA? I guess I
don't need to know the details of the bitstream, but I need to know how
the bitstream is inserted into the JTAG data.

At the moment my biggest hurdle (after learning VHDL!) will be getting
6.2 WebPACK running on wine.

Regards
Andrew
 
andrew<AT>rogerstech<DOT>co<DOT>uk wrote:
I have 5.1 ISE WebPACK running under wine but just discivered it doesn't
support Spartan3. From the archives I read about some difficulties
regarding 6.2 ISE running on wine, have these been solved?

http://www.fpga-faq.com/archives/70825.html

I urgently need to know if 6.2 ISE works under wine as I have just
ordered the $99 Spartan-3 Starter Kit. If not I shall need to cancel my
order.
It does appear to run, though with some err... "features". Since I have
the Linux version of ISE, I have not tested Webpack/Wine much.

First, Wine should be configured for a Version of "win2k". You also
should get a copy of a native version of msvcrt.dll somewhere, and
configure Wine to use it. If you are already running a previous version
of Webpack under Wine, then I would guess you already meet those
requirements.

When installing Webpack, you will get some error dialogs, and some Wine
processes will even crash. Don't worry, Webpack is still installed ok ;)
Really!

Finally, the biggest problem is that the GUI runs really slow with a
current Wine, due to a named pipes bug. But this is also the same as in
Webpack 5.1, so there will be no change here. If you are just using the
command line tools, then they run fine. You could patch a version of
Wine to run the GUI if you wanted; I have a patched version around that
runs the GUI fine.

--
My real email is akamail.com@dclark (or something like that).
 
In article <cdcgje0aap@news2.newsguy.com>, junkmail@junkmail.com
says...
andrew<AT>rogerstech<DOT>co<DOT>uk wrote:
I have 5.1 ISE WebPACK running under wine but just discivered it
doesn't
support Spartan3. From the archives I read about some difficulties
regarding 6.2 ISE running on wine, have these been solved?

http://www.fpga-faq.com/archives/70825.html

I urgently need to know if 6.2 ISE works under wine as I have just
ordered the $99 Spartan-3 Starter Kit. If not I shall need to cancel my
order.


It does appear to run, though with some err... "features". Since I have
the Linux version of ISE, I have not tested Webpack/Wine much.

First, Wine should be configured for a Version of "win2k". You also
should get a copy of a native version of msvcrt.dll somewhere, and
configure Wine to use it. If you are already running a previous version
of Webpack under Wine, then I would guess you already meet those
requirements.

When installing Webpack, you will get some error dialogs, and some Wine
processes will even crash. Don't worry, Webpack is still installed ok ;)
Really!

Finally, the biggest problem is that the GUI runs really slow with a
current Wine, due to a named pipes bug. But this is also the same as in
Webpack 5.1, so there will be no change here. If you are just using the
command line tools, then they run fine. You could patch a version of
Wine to run the GUI if you wanted; I have a patched version around that
runs the GUI fine.

--
My real email is akamail.com@dclark (or something like that).
Hello from Gregg C Levine
Just for the sake of arguement, where did you find the Linux version of the
tool? Every time I visit their webpages, all it talks about is the Windows
version of the tool. And I've tried searching the site, its search engine does
not properly return anything.
Gregg C Levine drwho8 atsign att dot net
"This signature says, "YACK!"."
 
Simon wrote:

.....

This was after I'd 'upgraded' to something I thought would handle large
amounts of memory well and synthesize/P&R faster... Oh well, back to
windows :-( Xilinx now has the dubious honour of being the only company
for which I maintain a Windows partition :-(

Simon.
I wonder how much Microsoft are paying Xilinx! After all Xilinx don't
release ISE WebPACK for Linux. Has anyone heard a REAL reason for Xilinx
not releasing WebPACK for Linux?

Andrew.
 
Gregg C Levine wrote:
In article <cdcgje0aap@news2.newsguy.com>, junkmail@junkmail.com
says...

andrew<AT>rogerstech<DOT>co<DOT>uk wrote:

I have 5.1 ISE WebPACK running under wine but just discivered it

doesn't

support Spartan3. From the archives I read about some difficulties
regarding 6.2 ISE running on wine, have these been solved?

http://www.fpga-faq.com/archives/70825.html

I urgently need to know if 6.2 ISE works under wine as I have just
ordered the $99 Spartan-3 Starter Kit. If not I shall need to cancel my
order.


It does appear to run, though with some err... "features". Since I have
the Linux version of ISE, I have not tested Webpack/Wine much.

First, Wine should be configured for a Version of "win2k". You also
should get a copy of a native version of msvcrt.dll somewhere, and
configure Wine to use it. If you are already running a previous version
of Webpack under Wine, then I would guess you already meet those
requirements.

When installing Webpack, you will get some error dialogs, and some Wine
processes will even crash. Don't worry, Webpack is still installed ok ;)
Really!

Finally, the biggest problem is that the GUI runs really slow with a
current Wine, due to a named pipes bug. But this is also the same as in
Webpack 5.1, so there will be no change here. If you are just using the
command line tools, then they run fine. You could patch a version of
Wine to run the GUI if you wanted; I have a patched version around that
runs the GUI fine.

--
My real email is akamail.com@dclark (or something like that).


Hello from Gregg C Levine
Just for the sake of arguement, where did you find the Linux version of the
tool? Every time I visit their webpages, all it talks about is the Windows
version of the tool. And I've tried searching the site, its search engine does
not properly return anything.
Gregg C Levine drwho8 atsign att dot net
"This signature says, "YACK!"."
You should also be aware that it doesn't appear to work well if you have
an Athlon64 processor. I've had Wine working fine under non-64 bit
processors, but can't get it to compile on 64-bit linux for the AMD64.

There was some traffic on the Wine list saying that it now works
perfectly, and if anyone has problems, it's an issue with their kernel
or libraries, but I've tried the very latest Fedora-2 + all patches +
latest kernel and still no joy :-(

This was after I'd 'upgraded' to something I thought would handle large
amounts of memory well and synthesize/P&R faster... Oh well, back to
windows :-( Xilinx now has the dubious honour of being the only company
for which I maintain a Windows partition :-(

Simon.
 
Simon <news@gornall.net> writes:

You should also be aware that it doesn't appear to work well if you
have an Athlon64 processor. I've had Wine working fine under non-64
bit processors, but can't get it to compile on 64-bit linux for the
AMD64.
The native Linux version of ISE runs on AMD64. Too bad there is no
WebPack for native Linux though.

Petter
--
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?
 
Andrew Rogers wrote:

I wonder how much Microsoft are paying Xilinx! After all Xilinx don't
release ISE WebPACK for Linux. Has anyone heard a REAL reason for Xilinx
not releasing WebPACK for Linux?
Well, annoying though it is, I don't think it's a conspiracy :) It's
probably a combination of:

o Most Linux WebPack users will never contribute sufficient funds back
to Xilinx to make it worth their while.

o They pay a per-seat licence for their officially-supported
foundation package on Linux to the GUI-library owners. They therefore
can't offer it as a download for WebPack.

What it would probably take would be a large customer saying "we're
going to move to Altera/whoever unless you do the port before XXX", with
XXX being a realistic target in the future. At that point, there's a
commercial pressure to do the port, and Xilinx can take a view on
whether it's worth it. Even then, their view might be 'see that lake,
run and jump' :)

Another route for Xilinx to get their finger out would be if
Altera/whoever did it first - Xilinx wouldn't be far behind then, I'd
imagine, bragging rights and image are nowhere near as important as
commercial pressures, but they still count :)

Simon.
 
Simon wrote:
Andrew Rogers wrote:


I wonder how much Microsoft are paying Xilinx! After all Xilinx don't
release ISE WebPACK for Linux. Has anyone heard a REAL reason for
Xilinx not releasing WebPACK for Linux?


Well, annoying though it is, I don't think it's a conspiracy :) It's
probably a combination of:

o Most Linux WebPack users will never contribute sufficient funds back
to Xilinx to make it worth their while.
Equally applicable to Windows WebPACK users in my opinion. I'll buy
FPGAs if the software is free, I'll buy nothing if the software isn't free.
o They pay a per-seat licence for their officially-supported foundation
package on Linux to the GUI-library owners. They therefore can't offer
it as a download for WebPack.
How about the command line tools; xst, map, par, bitgen, etc?
What it would probably take would be a large customer saying "we're
going to move to Altera/whoever unless you do the port before XXX", with
XXX being a realistic target in the future. At that point, there's a
commercial pressure to do the port, and Xilinx can take a view on
whether it's worth it. Even then, their view might be 'see that lake,
run and jump' :)
At 110Kg I'm a large customer! Xilinx, I'm moving to Altera if you don't
release the Linux WebPACK that you have hidden somewhere and are
keeping quiet about!
Another route for Xilinx to get their finger out would be if
Altera/whoever did it first - Xilinx wouldn't be far behind then, I'd
imagine, bragging rights and image are nowhere near as important as
commercial pressures, but they still count :)
Xilinx should retain their world leader status and should get in there
first!

Andrew.
 
"andrew<AT>rogerstech<DOT>co<DOT>uk" <"andrew<AT>rogerstech<DOT>co <DOT>uk"> wrote:
: I have 5.1 ISE WebPACK running under wine but just discivered it doesn't
: support Spartan3. From the archives I read about some difficulties
: regarding 6.2 ISE running on wine, have these been solved?

: http://www.fpga-faq.com/archives/70825.html

In "70825" nothing about wine is said. In "70836" I tell about the success I
have, your milage may vary.

: I urgently need to know if 6.2 ISE works under wine as I have just
: ordered the $99 Spartan-3 Starter Kit. If not I shall need to cancel my
: order.

: For those who haven't seen the Spartan 3 Kit:

: http://www.xilinx.com/products/spartan3/s3boards.htm

: Looks like a superb bit of kit, I will be buying a number of these for
: my University module. Having the RAM on board is great. The applications
: I have already thought about - add an ADC and you have a digital storage
: scope, Turbo decoder, LDPC codes and so on. We'll need to get the ISE
: 6.2 WebPACK running on Linux and write our own programmer software.

Watch for MITOUJTAG (http://www.nahitech.com/jtag-en/). I ran it with wine
to program XC95288XL and to test the pins and connections of a XC2V500-456.

: ...

--
Uwe Bonnes bon@elektron.ikp.physik.tu-darmstadt.de

Institut fuer Kernphysik Schlossgartenstrasse 9 64289 Darmstadt
--------- Tel. 06151 162516 -------- Fax. 06151 164321 ----------
 
Gregg C Levine wrote:
Hello from Gregg C Levine
Just for the sake of arguement, where did you find the Linux version of the
tool? Every time I visit their webpages, all it talks about is the Windows
version of the tool. And I've tried searching the site, its search engine does
not properly return anything.
Sorry, but I paid for the "full" ISE, which is the only way to get the
Linux version (the full ISE includes a couple of additional tools and
supports more parts). Hopefully Webpack will eventually be made
available in the Linux version. Possibly Xilinx, like many vendors,
wants to use there paying customers for beta testing. I think that they
realize the paying customers are probably a bit more experienced at
debugging the vendor tools ;)

--
My real email is akamail.com@dclark (or something like that).
 
Simon wrote:
You should also be aware that it doesn't appear to work well if you have
an Athlon64 processor. I've had Wine working fine under non-64 bit
processors, but can't get it to compile on 64-bit linux for the AMD64.
I had thought the application needs to be compiled for 64-bit operation,
otherwise there will be little benefit to running it on a 64 bit
processor. Are you seeing better performance running 32 bit apps on a 64
bit processor?

--
My real email is akamail.com@dclark (or something like that).
 
Duane Clark wrote:

Simon wrote:


You should also be aware that it doesn't appear to work well if you
have an Athlon64 processor. I've had Wine working fine under non-64
bit processors, but can't get it to compile on 64-bit linux for the
AMD64.


I had thought the application needs to be compiled for 64-bit operation,
otherwise there will be little benefit to running it on a 64 bit
processor. Are you seeing better performance running 32 bit apps on a 64
bit processor?
Well, I was initially hoping to compile Wine in 64-bit mode, figuring
that because it "wasn't an emulator", then when the Windows calls
finally made it through to the lower levels of Wine, it would be running
at 64-bits, although of course the windows code itself would only be
32-bit. The thing being that in 64-bit mode you get a swathe of new
registers etc, that (irrespective of the bit-ness) allow far more
flxibility to the compiler...

Anyway, my hopes were dashed. Wine wouldn't work, even in 32-bit mode :-(

Simon
 
In article <40fa495d_1@127.0.0.1>,
Andrew Rogers <andrew@_NO_SPAM_rogerstech.co.uk> wrote:
Simon wrote:

....

This was after I'd 'upgraded' to something I thought would handle large
amounts of memory well and synthesize/P&R faster... Oh well, back to
windows :-( Xilinx now has the dubious honour of being the only company
for which I maintain a Windows partition :-(

Simon.

I wonder how much Microsoft are paying Xilinx! After all Xilinx don't
release ISE WebPACK for Linux. Has anyone heard a REAL reason for Xilinx
not releasing WebPACK for Linux?
I think it's because they use that MainWin to port from Windows to Linux
and there is a per-seat license charge they pay for it. They could have
used Wine and Winelib to port from Windows to Linux for free, of course,
and then we wouldn't be asking all these questions ;-)

While the big EDA companies (that cater to ASICs) now consider Linux to be
a first-class citizen, the FPGA vendors (and EDA companies that cater to
FPGAs) still don't seem to know much about Linux. At least they've
started porting to Linux, but they're still developing on Windows and
porting to Linux (and other Unices) whereas the big guys are developing on
Linux and porting to Windows (I know this is true at Mentor Graphics for
example). The interesting thing is that if you're coming from the Windows
world (as Xilinx is) all you know about are proprietary tools whereas when
you're coming from the Linux world you tend to use cross-platform, open
source tools from the start. So porting from Linux to Windows is fairly
easy because you're probably using a cross platform GUI toolkit like Tk,
gtk or perhaps Qt. When you're locked into Windows as your development
platform, porting to Linux can be a pain (especially if you don't know about
Wine/Winelib, and you probably wouldn't if you're coming from the Windows
world).

So, as someone else mentioned, it's not a conspiracy with Micro$oft so
much as ignorance of the market and of the Linux world that leads to these
problems. We need to educate the vendors about Linux and about what's
possible (like we did the big EDA vendors several years ago). For
example, Xilinx could save a lot of $$ if they didn't use
MainWin for porting and used Wine/Winelib instead - perhaps they didn't
know about that option - and as an added bonus their product would (of
course) work under Wine.

BTW: The other issue with getting the Xilinx tools to work under Wine is
the Jungo parallel port driver. You may be able to get the development
tools to work under Wine, but you won't be able to program any parts with
Impact (unless something has changed very recently).

Phil
 
In article <WYsKc.451$h_3.116@newsfe6-gui.ntli.net>,
Simon <news@gornall.net> wrote:
Andrew Rogers wrote:


I wonder how much Microsoft are paying Xilinx! After all Xilinx don't
release ISE WebPACK for Linux. Has anyone heard a REAL reason for Xilinx
not releasing WebPACK for Linux?

Well, annoying though it is, I don't think it's a conspiracy :) It's
probably a combination of:

o Most Linux WebPack users will never contribute sufficient funds back
to Xilinx to make it worth their while.

o They pay a per-seat licence for their officially-supported
foundation package on Linux to the GUI-library owners. They therefore
can't offer it as a download for WebPack.

What it would probably take would be a large customer saying "we're
going to move to Altera/whoever unless you do the port before XXX", with
XXX being a realistic target in the future. At that point, there's a
commercial pressure to do the port, and Xilinx can take a view on
whether it's worth it. Even then, their view might be 'see that lake,
run and jump' :)

Another route for Xilinx to get their finger out would be if
Altera/whoever did it first - Xilinx wouldn't be far behind then, I'd
imagine, bragging rights and image are nowhere near as important as
commercial pressures, but they still count :)
It's interesting that for the big EDA companies (Synopsys, Mentor,
Cadence) the switch to supporting Linux happened several years ago and
now Linux is probably the majority platform for most of them. Sure,
it was easier for them to make the switch because they already did all
their development on some flavor of Unix, but there was still inertia to
overcome to get them to move to Linux. When serious customers started
asking for Linux, they bagan to take notice. Now, just as then, It will
take a lot of customer pressure to get the FPGA companies (and the FPGA
EDA companies) to properly support Linux.

As a Linux software developer who has done a bit of consulting I've seen
several environments that were primarily Windows development houses. The
people in these groups might be very good developers, but they have no
idea of what exists in the Linux world (or the open source world in
general). They tend to view it as if it were a
dangerous foreign country that they want to keep their distance from. So
what happens is that Linux developers have a hard time communicating with
Windows developers (and vice-versa). Right now in Xilinx, I would bet
that you've got a primarily Windows development culture. Sure they've
made steps toward Linux-land, but they're very cautious steps. With time
they'll discover that the Linux waters aren't shark-infested and they'll
become more adventurous ;-)

Phil
 
In article <40fa5b5e_1@127.0.0.1>,
Andrew Rogers <andrew@_NO_SPAM_rogerstech.co.uk> wrote:
Simon wrote:
Andrew Rogers wrote:


I wonder how much Microsoft are paying Xilinx! After all Xilinx don't
release ISE WebPACK for Linux. Has anyone heard a REAL reason for
Xilinx not releasing WebPACK for Linux?


Well, annoying though it is, I don't think it's a conspiracy :) It's
probably a combination of:

o Most Linux WebPack users will never contribute sufficient funds back
to Xilinx to make it worth their while.

Equally applicable to Windows WebPACK users in my opinion. I'll buy
FPGAs if the software is free, I'll buy nothing if the software isn't free.

o They pay a per-seat licence for their officially-supported foundation
package on Linux to the GUI-library owners. They therefore can't offer
it as a download for WebPack.

How about the command line tools; xst, map, par, bitgen, etc?
That still won't help when it comes to programming devices. The Jungo
parallel port driver doesn't work under Wine.

Phil
 
Uwe Bonnes wrote:
Phil Tomson <ptkwt@aracnet.com> wrote:
,,,
: That still won't help when it comes to programming devices. The Jungo
: parallel port driver doesn't work under Wine.

I had some success with http://www.nahitech.com/jtag-en/ running with wine.
Nahitafu will hopefully enable programming of more devices..

Bye
How about GtkJTAG from the same author? That runs on Linux, I have
downloaded and compiled it. The downside is that in needs to run as root
due to low level IO. But it should be possible to use the parport device
driver. I am currently working on a modification to GtkJTAG (well,
libjtag to be accurate) so that it uses the parport device driver.

As my Spartan 3 kit hasn't arrived yet I haven't been able to test GtkJTAG.

A seperate project aimed at Virtex:

http://www.ddtc.dimes.tudelft.nl/~rene/xilinx-jtag.c

As far as I can tell from XAPP188 this will also program Spartan2
devices and I can only guess that it may work for Spartan3. I can't find
an XAPP for spartan3 configuration using JTAG.

Regards
Andrew
 
Phil Tomson <ptkwt@aracnet.com> wrote:
,,,
: That still won't help when it comes to programming devices. The Jungo
: parallel port driver doesn't work under Wine.

I had some success with http://www.nahitech.com/jtag-en/ running with wine.
Nahitafu will hopefully enable programming of more devices..

Bye
--
Uwe Bonnes bon@elektron.ikp.physik.tu-darmstadt.de

Institut fuer Kernphysik Schlossgartenstrasse 9 64289 Darmstadt
--------- Tel. 06151 162516 -------- Fax. 06151 164321 ----------
 
In article <KfiLc.322$YM6.78@newsfe4-gui.ntli.net>,
Simon <news@gornall.net> wrote:
Phil Tomson wrote:


As a Linux software developer who has done a bit of consulting I've seen
several environments that were primarily Windows development houses. The
people in these groups might be very good developers, but they have no
idea of what exists in the Linux world (or the open source world in
general). They tend to view it as if it were a
dangerous foreign country that they want to keep their distance from. So
what happens is that Linux developers have a hard time communicating with
Windows developers (and vice-versa). Right now in Xilinx, I would bet
that you've got a primarily Windows development culture. Sure they've
made steps toward Linux-land, but they're very cautious steps. With time
they'll discover that the Linux waters aren't shark-infested and they'll
become more adventurous ;-)

Mmm, not sure I agree with that. Without wishing to be an apologist for
Xilinx (because basically I wish they'd get their act together and
support Linux as a tier-1 platform!), I don't think it's a 'unix/linux
is bad' attitude. They do support Suns, after all.
Yes, but I suspect that their Solaris port is in the same shape as their
Linux port. Also, I suspect that you can't program parts using Impact on
Solaris either. My point was that they seem to be doing all of their
initial development on Windows and then porting over to Linux (or
Solaris) using MainWin and this, of course, shows.

FWIW, I think it's a cost/reward thing. There's a large proportion of
people for whom the platform on which you code VHDL or verilog is
irrelevant. These people are more concerned with the end-product of
their design than the method of getting there, as all good designers
ought to be.
Perhaps, but these days most designers coming to FPGAs from the ASIC world
are used to running Linux (or perhaps Solaris) so they're not used to
dealing with all of the virus problems that come with running Windows and
they would prefer to not bother with them. Also, they may not want to
have to take the time it takes to make their Windows box feel like 'home'
(installing cygwin, scripting languages, etc.)

The issue comes when you have to change OS to do XYZ for a while rather
than ABC. With the right environment, it's pretty hard to find any
situation where it's impossible to do something on Windows that it is
possible to do on Linux: all the 'really useful' things about Unix have
been ported to Windows to fill the gaps. What then is the reason to
still want a native Linux port ?
As stated above: the 'really useful' part of Linux/Unix that has not been
ported to Windows yet is stability (and security). Freedom from
viruses/worms etc. That's a big reason why people are not wanting to run
Windows now and are looking at Linux.

Well, for me (and it's a personal view), it's a matter of 'Linux is my
work environment', and 'although there are workarounds (mingw, Wine,
etc) none of them really cut the mustard. To whit, I've just had to go
and buy Windows XP (and PC world, the only "nearby" computer shop, only
had the 'professional' version!) So I'm already Ł270 ($400 or so for our
US friends) down. Now I have to reboot into XP to do any experimenting:



Now, I have an idea that I think could be worth some money. What I'm
going to do over the next few months is evaluate whether it'll work, and
if so, purchase Foundation, because for me, the $2500 (=Ł1800 after
import, probably) will be worth it just for the time spent not switching
OS all the time, oh yeah, and it allows me to access the larger chips
:) The critical thing though is that it works under Linux, and I'm
willing to put that much money into a bet that I can get a return (hey,
I'm only an amateur at this, for you professionals, it obviously makes
sense to get Foundation :)
You're very committed to the hobby! I can't afford such commitment at
this time. However, I think it' also important to note that there are
companies out there running Linux and doing ASIC development on Linux and
as they look more and more at FPGAs they want tools that will run well on
Linux.

I guess the take-home message of what I'm trying to say, is that
although for some (perhaps a lot of) people the platform we work with is
agnostic. However I'd be willing to guess that most of those people are
already Windows users, and therefore 'agnostic' because it doesn't
affect their existing choice. My PC (until recently) didn't have Windows
on it. For me, the platform is an issue, to the point that I'm willing
to spend serious cash to stop it from being such.

Xilinx, please take note: I'm using your devices despite your policy,
not because I love it. I suspect that there are more like me, and I
further suspect the number is growing. Please at least think about
supporting the Linux platform more.
Amen.

Phil
 
In article <40fd9deb_1@127.0.0.1>,
Andrew Rogers <andrew@_NO_SPAM_rogerstech.co.uk> wrote:
Uwe Bonnes wrote:
Phil Tomson <ptkwt@aracnet.com> wrote:
,,,
: That still won't help when it comes to programming devices. The Jungo
: parallel port driver doesn't work under Wine.

I had some success with http://www.nahitech.com/jtag-en/ running with wine.
Nahitafu will hopefully enable programming of more devices..

Bye

How about GtkJTAG from the same author? That runs on Linux, I have
downloaded and compiled it. The downside is that in needs to run as root
due to low level IO. But it should be possible to use the parport device
driver. I am currently working on a modification to GtkJTAG (well,
libjtag to be accurate) so that it uses the parport device driver.
There is a libjtag?

As my Spartan 3 kit hasn't arrived yet I haven't been able to test GtkJTAG.

A seperate project aimed at Virtex:

http://www.ddtc.dimes.tudelft.nl/~rene/xilinx-jtag.c

As far as I can tell from XAPP188 this will also program Spartan2
devices and I can only guess that it may work for Spartan3. I can't find
an XAPP for spartan3 configuration using JTAG.
Thanks for the links.

Phil
 
Phil Tomson wrote:

As a Linux software developer who has done a bit of consulting I've seen
several environments that were primarily Windows development houses. The
people in these groups might be very good developers, but they have no
idea of what exists in the Linux world (or the open source world in
general). They tend to view it as if it were a
dangerous foreign country that they want to keep their distance from. So
what happens is that Linux developers have a hard time communicating with
Windows developers (and vice-versa). Right now in Xilinx, I would bet
that you've got a primarily Windows development culture. Sure they've
made steps toward Linux-land, but they're very cautious steps. With time
they'll discover that the Linux waters aren't shark-infested and they'll
become more adventurous ;-)
Mmm, not sure I agree with that. Without wishing to be an apologist for
Xilinx (because basically I wish they'd get their act together and
support Linux as a tier-1 platform!), I don't think it's a 'unix/linux
is bad' attitude. They do support Suns, after all.

FWIW, I think it's a cost/reward thing. There's a large proportion of
people for whom the platform on which you code VHDL or verilog is
irrelevant. These people are more concerned with the end-product of
their design than the method of getting there, as all good designers
ought to be.

The issue comes when you have to change OS to do XYZ for a while rather
than ABC. With the right environment, it's pretty hard to find any
situation where it's impossible to do something on Windows that it is
possible to do on Linux: all the 'really useful' things about Unix have
been ported to Windows to fill the gaps. What then is the reason to
still want a native Linux port ?

Well, for me (and it's a personal view), it's a matter of 'Linux is my
work environment', and 'although there are workarounds (mingw, Wine,
etc) none of them really cut the mustard. To whit, I've just had to go
and buy Windows XP (and PC world, the only "nearby" computer shop, only
had the 'professional' version!) So I'm already Ł270 ($400 or so for our
US friends) down. Now I have to reboot into XP to do any experimenting:

o Hey! what if I use a blockram for the register file, and the high
bit on the 6-bit register part of the opcode to select the 'switchable'
32 bank of registers. I can have 16 banks, 64 registers in total with
the lower 32 at all times and 15x32 switchable). Use as thread-local or
subroutine accelerators. Worth a try!

o Hey! What if I use the parity entries of the blockram to implement a
'this i-or-d-cache value is valid' flag. The CPU can increment it's
current tag-is-valid 'count' on cache-reset, and only actually clear the
cache (and hence introduce delay) when 'count' cycles around to 0.
That's a 16x win :)

o Hey! You get the idea. If it takes 15 mins to shut down all the
programs I'm usually and normally running under Linux (since that's my
work environment), and reboot into XP and try something, I'm far less
likely to do it.

Now, I have an idea that I think could be worth some money. What I'm
going to do over the next few months is evaluate whether it'll work, and
if so, purchase Foundation, because for me, the $2500 (=Ł1800 after
import, probably) will be worth it just for the time spent not switching
OS all the time, oh yeah, and it allows me to access the larger chips
:) The critical thing though is that it works under Linux, and I'm
willing to put that much money into a bet that I can get a return (hey,
I'm only an amateur at this, for you professionals, it obviously makes
sense to get Foundation :)

I guess the take-home message of what I'm trying to say, is that
although for some (perhaps a lot of) people the platform we work with is
agnostic. However I'd be willing to guess that most of those people are
already Windows users, and therefore 'agnostic' because it doesn't
affect their existing choice. My PC (until recently) didn't have Windows
on it. For me, the platform is an issue, to the point that I'm willing
to spend serious cash to stop it from being such.

Xilinx, please take note: I'm using your devices despite your policy,
not because I love it. I suspect that there are more like me, and I
further suspect the number is growing. Please at least think about
supporting the Linux platform more.

[grin: no, not really a Xilinx apologist :)]

Simon
 

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor

Back
Top