Newbie assistance for Atmel at89c2051 project

Terry wrote:
> Chris Hills wrote
> > <tjporter@gronk.porter.net> writes
> >>
... snip ...
> >
> >> SDCC will always be available, and for Free,
> >
> > This is not guaranteed, neither are bug fixes.
> 
> Nothing is guaranteed, except death and taxes.
> 
> >> how many people have been burned when closed source products
> >> are no longer available as a result of a takeover etc ?
> >
> > Likewise with free products.
> 
> What kind of "free products" are you talking about ?
> 
> I'm specifically referring to "Free" ie software licensed under
> the GPL.

You have the obvious cure available - download and store the
source yourself.  You can now take over maintenance whenever you
please.

-- 
Chuck F (cbfalconer@yahoo.com) (cbfalconer@worldnet.att.net)
   Available for consulting/temporary embedded and systems.
   <http://cbfalconer.home.att.net>  USE worldnet address!

Chris Hills threw some tea leaves on the floor
 and this is what they wrote:

> In article <78lfc1-47g.ln1@gronk.porter.net>, Terry
><tjporter@gronk.porter.net> writes
>>Chris Hills threw some tea leaves on the floor
>> and this is what they wrote:
>>
>>> BTW any news on SCO  "owning" Linux and
>>> C++?
>>
>>For those that don't know, the SCO lawsuit is with IBM, it has nothing
>>to do with GNU/Linux.
>
> They are actually claiming that the "own" parts of the Linux kernel (and
> all of C++ as well)

I must be falling behind, I haven't heard the C++ ownership clams by
SCO.

> They intend to charge royalties on all Linux (and
> C++ ) users... They must be pretty desperate to do this because as soon
> as they do identify the code I can see it taking about a month before
> the next release comes out without that code in.  So it won't make any
> difference.

Agreed, but first I'd like to see them *prove* that they own
anything. My current SCO believability meter is hard against the 0
stop.

>
>>... SCO extortion mode on ...
>>Oh by the way Chris, I own all the Keil source code, I don't intend to
>>prove it to anyone (because my code is secret), and if you don't want
>>to be sued as a Keil end user, you had better pay me $800 right away.
>>Or else.
>>.... SCO extortion mode off ....
>
> The difference is that AFAIK SCO have identified certain areas that they
> believe are theirs.

This is not correct. SCO have not shown any code that is theirs and is
in GNU/Linux. They had two "showings" of alleged code (where much of the code
was blacked out or discuised) and on both occasions the code was
tracked down within hours and shown to be code that SCO doesn't own.

http://perens.com/SCO/SCOSlideShow.html

> As it is open source this they will have to show
> that they developed the source first and that is it is the same stuff.

Actually the dispute is with IBM, there is *no OSS dispute before any
court by SCO*

Sure Darl McBribe has made a lot of noise in the press and in fact has
has made many OSS related claims, but there is no legal action regarding
OSS by SCO pending.

On the other hand SCO has been sued by RedHat for the claims that SCO
have made, and the damage they have caused RedHat as a result.

> It's not quite the same as the scenario above. The code is open. 
>
> I think the "case" is that they did some stuff for IBM that IBM later
> released into the Gnu/Linux chain.

This all incredibly murky:-

This is the actual guts of the *legal dispute*:-
It's my understanding that the code that SCO *claim* belongs to them,
was actually developed by IBM and the license that IBM bought from
Novel (before Novel sold the rights to SCO) is purported to give SCO
ownership of any IBM developed code on UNIX System 5 technology.

Here is an analysts summary of SCOs claims, in the pending legal action
SCO vs IBM:-

"IBM supported GNU/Linux with code and/or knowledge derived from the
original AT&T Unix (now owned by SCO).  Largely in the form of
printer drivers (presumably the IBM Omni printer drivers) and
unspecified linux kernel code enhancements, largely supported on
the basis of IBM marketing or press statements.."

Darl McBride and Chris Sontag have made many wild and unsubstantiated
claims that are not the subject of legal actions anywhere, and until
they are and the cases are resolved, I think it's safe to completely
ignore them.

........SCO mode on........
In the same vein Chris, I note I haven't received your $800 license
payment for using Keil products that I claim are based on my code.
What's up with that?
.......SCO mode off.......

> However as you say it is all very
> flimsy. I think it is a last ditch attempt by SCO to stay afloat. AFAIK
> SCO is what used to be Caldera.

You're exactly right, Caldera was sold by Ray Noorda and became SCO.

>
> Also how the hell they think they can justify owning C++ beats me. No
> wonder Californian lawyers are rich.

SCO has made many outrageous claims and *none* of them have been proven
in a court of law, or even demonstrated by SCO to be factual.

The theory as you say is just a "pump n dump" scheme by Darl McBride
to keep the share prices high, as SCO aren't making any money selling 
their version of UNIX.

Ironically the latest SCO UNIX offerings are full of OSS products, such as
Samba.


-- 
              Kind Regards from Terry 
    My Desktop is powered by GNU/LinuX, Gentoo-1.4_rc2   
         New Homepage: http://milkstone.d2.net.au/          
 ** Linux Registration Number: 103931,  http://counter.li.org **

CBFalconer threw some tea leaves on the floor
 and this is what they wrote:

> Terry wrote:
>> Chris Hills wrote
>> > <tjporter@gronk.porter.net> writes
>> >>
> ... snip ...
>> >
>> >> SDCC will always be available, and for Free,
>> >
>> > This is not guaranteed, neither are bug fixes.
>> 
>> Nothing is guaranteed, except death and taxes.
>> 
>> >> how many people have been burned when closed source products
>> >> are no longer available as a result of a takeover etc ?
>> >
>> > Likewise with free products.
>> 
>> What kind of "free products" are you talking about ?
>> 
>> I'm specifically referring to "Free" ie software licensed under
>> the GPL.
>
> You have the obvious cure available - download and store the
> source yourself.  You can now take over maintenance whenever you
> please.

Exactly. SDCC source is readily available, (I've got about the last 5
versions myself) and anyone anywhere can compile and use it on anything
they want to.

If it was *really* important to have it modified to suit yourself,
there is no problem paying a programmer to do just that.


-- 
              Kind Regards from Terry 
    My Desktop is powered by GNU/LinuX, Gentoo-1.4_rc2   
         New Homepage: http://milkstone.d2.net.au/          
 ** Linux Registration Number: 103931,  http://counter.li.org **

Davon Shire threw some tea leaves on the floor
 and this is what they wrote:

> Davon Shire wrote:
>> Greetings everyone,
>>   I have a specific application I want to put a atmel processor to. The 
>> processor would be along the lines of a AT89C2051-24, ideally something 
>> I can program easily say using their ISP system.
>>   I have a proto board design I found on the net for said mcu and it 
>> pretty well fits what I need for this. However. Since I have NO 
>> experience in programming one of these things. I was curious if there is 
>> a simulator that you'd recommend I could use to learn how to use this 
>> beast before I launch into building the real thing and realize I can't 
>> make it work.
>>   I do have windows machines, but I prefer using my Freebsd boxes. Any 
>> answer right now will be helpful on this. I'm doing this project for a 
>> non-profit organization and I have zero budget save what I'm throwing in 
>> which isn't much.
>>   A general idea of what I'm going to do with this. Is use it to 
>> translate a 3x4 matrix keypad output into a serial ascii equiv. So a 
>> computer can check the info in a database and respond with a command to 
>> start a motor to open a garage door. The mcu will also determin if the 
>> door is open or closed.
>>   That's the general idea of what I'm doing with this. Any and all 
>> assistance is greatly appreciated.
>> 
>> Davon
>> 
>
> It's a new year let's put this one to rest and get some work done.
>
> Dear Terry and Chris.
>
>    Thank you both for your time and diligence in this discussion. I have 
> used the content of my first post to help point out a few things and 
> maybe bring to focus what's really important.
>
>    Chris you are an Engineer type. You have all your credentials and 
> your whatever and that's great.
>
>    Terry you have the heart of pit bull

Bwahahahah, but I'm not nearly as vicious as one :)

> (meant in a good way)

I took it that way, after all to advocate Free Software in a Windows
world, one must develop thick skin in the first few years. :)
I've been running only GNU/Linux, on the desktop since August 1997, by
way of background.


> and the 
> brains of dedicated developer for OSS. Both are greatly appreciated. You 
>   did some fine foot work asking back questions and giving answers but 
> really. In the end it's not going to matter if Chris paid attention to 
> my first post or not, here's why.
>
>    I want to make this work in the worst/best way. I haven't got the 
> board yet. But I'm dreaming code and taking stomach tablets waiting to 
> get into the project and get it done.
>
>    Chris your major failing was you said. 'Don't use SDCC' which is kind 
> of like saying, "nevermind using the sidewalk. Get from point A - B 
> using the bus." Your reasoning being really that the bus had more bells, 
> whistles and a better map of the city. Even though I mentioned I have a 
> nice pair of tennis shoes. (FreeBSD box) and wanted to use them.
>
>    Terry, clearly you know more about the SDCC than I do, and you have 
> made some excellent points as to why I could/would want to use it. I 
> still haven't much of a clue how to make use of the simulator but I need 
> to read more I'm sure.

Well said, and it's a fair learning curve as with any new tool.

>
>    Facts that are now current in this project.
>    1. I bought for about $65.00 US a prebuilt LPC932 proto board from 
> the www.8052.com site. It seems to cover pretty much everything I need.
>
>    2. this means I'm going to have the crippled Keil software, which I 
> can use and will use if it's easier/quicker.

Absolutely, use whatever tool suits you best, that's my motto.

>
>    3. I'm going to need to learn to write code so I can take the pieces 
> that's been pointed out to me and try and put them together. Hopefully 
> in a dependable and functional way.
>
>    4. Optimization was really never a factor in this design. Because I 
> Just want it to WORK.
>
>    5. I only picked the at89c2051 because I had found a schematic and 
> pcb design I could use to put it together. I didn't see how I could 
> program it though. So that was how I got this whole thing started to 
> begin with.

In that case why not use an Avr Mega ? :)
That's what I use these days with Avr-Gcc and I love it, it's much more
mature than SDCC. I've got one clocking at 24Mhz on my bench at the
moment, (damn that's fast) but don't tell the people here or Atmel will
just raise the prices for the 8 Mhz Mega8l ;-)

>
>    6. I have no dedication to any platform save the ones I can cheaply 
> aquire. I'd have used a basic stamp if it looked like a good cheap idea.

Hey that's a bit sensible, where is your brand and product zealotry ?

>
>    7. A Simulator is a must I feel if I'm going to have a chance to make 
> this work. And a simulator that works in a way I can figure out is even 
> better. The S51 simulator seems good but alot like gdb when it comes to 
> using it. It took me about 2 weeks to really get a decent grasp on gdb.

Gdb is complex, but most debuggers are I think ? You can see DDD (the
GUI debugger running as a front end to Gdb) on my site debugging some
8051 code.

It's a little rough around the edges in many areas, and I'd like to
point out that I'm not comparing it to Keil or claiming that it's
"better", in fact in many areas I bet Keil is *vastly* easier and more
straightforward to use.

Chris wouldn't be so outspoken about Keil unless it was a great
product! 

However SDCC is GPL'd, Free and under slow development at the moment.
It will do code for the 8051 family, some PIC variants and a few other
micros in C. It  has a simulator that can be used with GUI front ends
such as DDD.

>
>    8. I need to program this in C, simply because I know C the best and 
> bit fiddling with ASM would melt my brain and increase the development time.

I think C is perfect for your project, as your project is small and
there aren't any timing constraints, correct me if I'm wrong ?

>
>    9. If/when this job is finished. I may well become interested in 
> designing more with these chips. they seem incredibly well priced for 
> hobbiests. I have day dreamed a dozen more uses for these chips to help 
> friends and have fun with.
>
>    10. I very much appreciate the views and opinions of eveyone here and 
> I hope in the future I may have a chance to contribute.
>
>
> Best wishes for a good new year for one and all.

A really concise post Davron, I think you have it all under control :)

Thanks for your debate as well Chris, you dealt with my points like a
true gentleman:)



-- 
              Kind Regards from Terry 
    My Desktop is powered by GNU/LinuX, Gentoo-1.4_rc2   
         New Homepage: http://milkstone.d2.net.au/          
 ** Linux Registration Number: 103931,  http://counter.li.org **

In article <j74ic1-r5i.ln1@gronk.porter.net>, Terry
<tjporter@gronk.porter.net> writes
>Chris Hills threw some tea leaves on the floor
> and this is what they wrote:
>
>> In article <78lfc1-47g.ln1@gronk.porter.net>, Terry
>><tjporter@gronk.porter.net> writes
>>>Chris Hills threw some tea leaves on the floor
>>> and this is what they wrote:
>>>
>>>> BTW any news on SCO  "owning" Linux and
>>>> C++?
>>>
>>>For those that don't know, the SCO lawsuit is with IBM, it has nothing
>>>to do with GNU/Linux.
>>
>> They are actually claiming that the "own" parts of the Linux kernel (and
>> all of C++ as well)
>
>I must be falling behind, I haven't heard the C++ ownership clams by
>SCO.

This is what I saw re SCO and  C++ (see below) ....  How they hell they
expect to enforce this in the VERY unlikely outside chance that the win
is any bodies guess.

In the C and C++ standards panels they haven't stopped laughing.  Even
Dennis Richte commented (see below)

 
In article <bt5cmu$bd1@netnews.proxy.lucent.com>, Dennis Ritchie
<dmr@bell-labs.com> writes
>"Chris Hills" <chris@phaedsys.org> wrote in message news:gcV6kLCh5Z9$EAp3@phaeds
>ys.demon.co.uk...
> ....
>> Well I thought Dennis Richie said on here the other day that AT&T signed
>> C over to ANSI. I assume he has some idea of what he is talking about ....
>
>What would have been assigned was the right for ANSI to adapt the
>extant AT&T documentation for the language in the preparation
>of the C89 standard (not C99--typo in my post).  And indeed
>much of the structure and wording of (say) K&R 1  Appendix A is
>present in that standard, though there's also a lot of addition
>and change as well.
>
>The language as a language was never subject to IP
>protection--the company (and I thought it would be
>useful to have a national (later international) standard for it.
>Indeed, there were independent implementations of C.
>
>About Hills's quotation about SCO's C++ position--
>I have a letter or so in which Novell disclaims interest
>in various C++ properties which had been part of the
>USL->Novell sale.  However, I don't know if this aspect
>was ever finalized, or for that matter what the current
>SCO C++ product consists of.
>
>    Dennis


So it makes the comments blow look as though some one is taking mind
altering substances :-)

Next SCO claim they invented the internet :-)

/////////////////////////////

 SCO already believe they own C++ and
have been claiming license revenue for years...

From Alexander Terekhov on the Boost lists:

http://techupdate.zdnet.com/techupdate/stories/main/0,14179,2877578,00.h
tml

<quote author="Darl McBride" when=2002>

We get several dozen requests a month just to come in and see AIX 
or HP-UX code base. And C++ programming languages, we own those, 
have licensed them out multiple times, obviously. We have a lot of 
royalties coming to us from C++. It was interesting to see the 
depth of Caldera's intellectual capital.

</quote>

http://www.mozillaquest.com/Linux03/ScoSource-02_Story03.html#C++_Issues

<quote>

C++ Issues 

MozillaQuest Magazine: C++ appears to be one of the properties 
that SCO acquired through Novell's acquisition of AT&T's UNIX 
Systems Laboratories and subsequent purchase of Novell's UNIX 
interests by SCO. At this time most Linux and/or GNU/Linux 
distributions include C++ compilers and editors. Is this 
something for which SCO currently charges? If so, just what 
are the current arrangements? If not, will C++ licensing and 
enforcement be added to SCO's licensing and enforcement program?

Blake Stowell: C++ is one of the properties that SCO owns today 
and we frequently are approached by customers who wish to license 
C++ from us and we do charge for that. Those arrangements are 
done on a case-by-case basis with each customer and are not 
disclosed publicly. C++ licensing is currently part of SCO's 
SCOsource licensing program. 

MozillaQuest Magazine: How about GNU C++? Does GNU C++ use 
SCO IP? If so, could SCO license and/or charge for use of its 
IP in GNU C++?

Blake Stowell: I honestly don't know.

MozillaQuest Magazine: Does the C++ that currently is included 
in most if not all Linux distributions contain SCO IP?

(a) If so, is that being done with or without SCO 
permissions/licensing?

(b) If so, what impact/affect does this have on the ability 
of people to freely distribute and use copies of those 
Linux distributions? (Under GNU licensing, anyone may 
make as many copies of a GNU/Linux distribution as they 
please, freely distribute them for no charge and/or for 
a charge, and use a GNU/Linux on as many computes as they 
please -- at no charge. Etc.)

Blake Stowell: Again, I don't know. That's something we would 
have to research.

</quote>

regards,
alexander.

P.S. http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=13342

<quote>

6 SCO will sue and send $1M bills to every government branch 
found using Linux. IBM's CEO will offer NASA $1B cash 
and indemnify the agency from any damages if they make SCO's 
Darl McBride a "space tourist" in orbit, but with no return 
ticket. 

</quote>

/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills  Staffs  England    /\/\/\/\/\
/\/\/ chris@phaedsys.org       www.phaedsys.org \/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/