On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 5:29 PM, Martin Langhoff <martin@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> This could be split to a single-robot-type package with a single udev
> (and I hope PK) rule. However, I think the best solution is to have a
> "robot-control" package that creates a group ("robot-control"?) and
> udev and PK rules that match all the supported robot models.
Ah, I missed the replies initially (my fault -- I'm not copied on list
traffic, if you could kindly CC...)
In cases where a specific package controls a specific robot, perhaps
it makes sense, but... will it stay that way?
The lego NXT case is a clear case in point -- we have nbc and
nxt_python that control it. WeDo boards, GoGo boards, Scratch boards
and Arduino boards are soon going to be in the same situation. And I
hope that every interesting bit of hardware out there ends up with
several packages that can control it :-)
These are all consumer / prosumer(?) / hobbyist boards -- and OLPC is
hoping to support several in our next release -- so it makes sense to
have
- a single package with udev & PolicyKit rules -- if there isn't
agreement on this, I'll just call it olpc-robots-rules :-)
- a single unix group -- 'robots' ? -- to limit the group sprawl and
hassle for cases where PK rules aren't useful
As Hedayat mentions, I see (low/moderate cost) robotic hw a lot like
printers. For high-end gear, it makes sense to treat it "special",
expect and admin to add users to groups, etc.
But the robotics stuff I'm looking at... is for the classroom. Must be
plug-and-play, and homes & labs will probably have several robot
models.
cheers,
m
--
martin@xxxxxxxxxx -- Software Architect - OLPC
- ask interesting questions
- don't get distracted with shiny stuff - working code first
- http://wiki.laptop.org/go/User:Martinlanghoff
_______________________________________________
robotics mailing list
robotics@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/robotics
