gnupic: Re: [gnupic] ready to start-Is it tested?
Subject:
Re: [gnupic] ready to start-Is it tested?
From:
דניאל ####@####.####
Date:
28 Mar 2006 21:58:10 +0100
Message-Id: <442AF4F7.7060302@013.net.il>
Hi .
the programmer you have shoun here is look like the
ideal programmer I ever met,but:
1.I don't see any port for gnu/linux
2.No one take care of it (I looked for the author,who is he?)
3.According to you,some of the schematics don't meet the picture.
If you have you implemented it ,Did it work?
I would like to implement that programmer and port it to gnu/linux.
With Appreciation,Daniel Yaury.
Maxim Wexler wrote:
>On 3/27/06, Jan Wagemakers ####@####.#### wrote:
>
>
>>Maxim Wexler ####@####.#### schreef:
>>
>>
>>
>>>>>What's the best program(s) to use. Will a home built programmer suit
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>or
>>
>>
>>>>>should I order one ready made.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>I make use of a home built programmer and picprog. You can find more
>>>>info at <http://hyvatti.iki.fi/~jaakko/pic/picprog.html>. picprog is a
>>>>commandline tool, so X is not needed.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>16LF87-I isn't included in $picprog --help. Has this been updated?
>>>
>>>
>>PIC16F87 is included. I have not tried the PIC16LF87 myself, but have
>>succesfully programmed a PIC18LF452 and a PIC18LF4520. So, it seems to
>>me that the programming algorithm between the F and LF parts are the
>>same.
>>
>>Please correct me when I'm wrong ;-)
>>
>>
>>
>>>Also the schematic at hyvatti.iki.fi/~jaako/pic/picprog.html and at
>>>jdm.homepage.newpics.html which are linked from a common page are
>>>
>>>
>>slightly
>>
>>
>>>different. Which is the one I want? Or, which is preferable?
>>>
>>>
>>No idea. I have build my programmer in 2003 and used the schematic at
>>picprog.html. But according to picprog.html the schematic at
>><http://www.jdm.homepage.dk/newpic.htm> is a better choice.
>>
>>
>
>
>
>But the photo of the device and the schematic aren't the same. For instance,
>the photo has only one electrolytic and has what looks like an 8 pin
>connector
>
>
>
