12864 Modification
-
@bearer said in 12864 Modification:
please see https://github.com/dc42/RepRapFirmware/blob/dev/BuildInstructions.md
something tells me you'll be better off getting a supported display.
-
@bearer Well I built an adapter for my MKS Gen v1.4 and modified the code for it with no problems. I like the wifi and I would like to have a backup way to control the printer.
-
@bearer said in 12864 Modification:
That’s pretty cool, I didn’t know that could be done. Unfortunately the author doesn’t say which firmware version he did this on, so replicating it may be difficult. Maybe ask him directly (his email address is on the blog page). The thread he links as a source is older still: https://forum.duet3d.com/topic/6449/making-the-lcd-12864-work-on-the-duetwifi-please-advise/7
Ian
-
@droftarts said in 12864 Modification:
I didn’t know that could be done.
I think dc42 recently said it could be done, but the firmware support wasn't there to discourage issues with level translation, from what I can tell only defines in that .h file needs changing so the blog should still be valid as the same defines are still in use it seems.
-
IMO it would be more worthwhile to put the 12864 on an Arduino or RPi and have that talk the paneldue or the rest API to a duet board. That way you'd support duet3 boards immediately as well (-;
But then I am not putting work towards this currently so it's all idle talk on my side. You scratch your itch your way (-;
-
@oliof said in 12864 Modification:
IMO it would be more worthwhile to put the 12864 on an Arduino or RPi and have that talk the paneldue or the rest API to a duet board.
while i understand the idea; it would require loads more code and as 2nd gen Duet get RPi support it becomes a bit of a moot point. if low cost is the primary concern then the maestro which already has support is the obvious choice anyway (its also rumoured to be revamped to a wifi version down the line)
but i absolutely agree about the itch:)
-
but it would turn into code that is disentangled from the duet firmware, just like DSF and DWC. So it could be Someone Else's Pro
blemject to maintain (-: -
I wasn't aware that anyone had madre a 12864 adapter for the Duet WiFi/Ethernet. Now that I know that there are at least 2 out there, I will look at making 12864 support standard in the firmware.
Duet WiFi hardware designer and firmware engineer
Please do not ask me for Duet support via PM or email, use the forum
http://www.escher3d.com, https://miscsolutions.wordpress.com -
While the schematic looks complete, there is no board layout so according to the blog its breadboard or veroboard all the way. (But its not all that much trouble to make a board with jlcpcb from the easyeda schematic)
((edit: actually schematics has the duet pins mirrored; H2 pin 10 is 5v on the schematic, but it should be pin 1 on CONN_SD. Its sort of hinted to in the description of the keyed shrouds, but as the ones on the Duet are already in place, the correct orientation that might be a tad confusing))
-
@dc42 That would be great! So the schematic is from a working model that Scheck made and it is working. You have to follow the schematic closely and recheck and double check your work. I found the .h file to add the pin assignments. question I have is, after the changes are made does the code need to be compiled?
-
@dc42 One more question, if you add support for the 12864 will the adapter board still be needed?
-
@Newbie said in 12864 Modification:
question I have is, after the changes are made does the code need to be compiled?
for the 3rd time:
@bearer said in 12864 Modification:
please see https://github.com/dc42/RepRapFirmware/blob/dev/BuildInstructions.md
@Newbie said in 12864 Modification:
@dc42 One more question, if you add support for the 12864 will the adapter board still be needed?
yes (although it might not be the same adapter, but a adapter is needed)
-
@bearer Why can't you just answer the question? Are you just lazy or do you think you are better than the new users?
-
Someone got rubbed the wrong way.
-
@A-Former-User said in 12864 Modification:
@dc42 That would be great! So the schematic is from a working model that Scheck made and it is working. You have to follow the schematic closely and recheck and double check your work. I found the .h file to add the pin assignments. question I have is, after the changes are made does the code need to be compiled?
Yes, until I include 12864 support in the firmware as standard.
-
@Phaedrux said in 12864 Modification:
Someone got rubbed the wrong way.
I might subscribe to the whole give a man a fish vs teach a man to fish thing, sort of. But I hardly think its justified calling me lazy when the guy didn't even bother clicking the links to realize he had all the information required if not spoon fed.
I did make the mistake of incorrectly assuming the guy was as described failing to locate a single file, and as such the most likely solution was the file being in one of the other repositories - which I quickly corrected and provided links to both the file and the build instructions before he proceeds to ask for what was just provided. Meh.
-
@A-Former-User said in 12864 Modification:
@bearer Why can't you just answer the question? Are you just lazy or do you think you are better than the new users?
Wow, he DIRECTLY answered it three times, via a link to a more complete answer than anyone could possibly type. Kudos to him for hanging in there. I personally would have just started ignoring the thread the after the second time.
There are many days I wish this forum software had a "bozo filter". As forums go, it has amazingly little drama; at the same time, it doesn't take much for a volunteer enthusiast who spends tons of time helping others, for that person to have that enthusiasm eroded, eventually moving on to something else.
Such a filter would let anyone who wishes filter out me. A-Former-User and I could simply disappear from each other's universe. How cool would that be?
-
I read this whole thread and I was curious so I went to the places pointed out and nothing that I saw tells anyone if you need to recompile. A simple answer of yes or no would have been enough. It looks to me that the trend in the forums all over is to direct the person asking the question to some link.
-
@DueDue said in 12864 Modification:
It looks to me that the trend in the forums all over is to direct the person asking the question to some link.
it has the advantage of not duplicating information that may go stale. the downside is of course bit rot but for a closely coupled link like this forum or the associated github its better imo.
@DueDue said in 12864 Modification:
I read this whole thread and I was curious so I went to the places pointed out and nothing that I saw tells anyone if you need to recompile. A simple answer of yes or no would have been enough.
lol, the first thing you did as a brand new user? sure. welcome back and good luck with the 12864...
-
This thread is now locked. I'm sorry this has been necessary, but I want to wrap up the thread with the useful information for anyone following this thread.
@A-Former-User said in 12864 Modification:
question I have is, after the changes are made does the code need to be compiled?
Yes. Generally, RepRapFirmware is monolithic and does not need to be recompiled; you just use the pre-compiled firmware and upload it to your Duet. However, if you need to add/change functionality, and actually edit the firmware source code as in this thread, you WILL need to set up the software to edit and compile the firmware as described in this link: https://github.com/dc42/RepRapFirmware/blob/dev/BuildInstructions.md
@A-Former-User said in 12864 Modification:
One more question, if you add support for the 12864 will the adapter board still be needed?
Yes. Support for the 12864 comes in two parts; first support in firmware, and then some extra hardware, to level-shift the logic from 3.3V to 5V. The hardware and firmware support are already present in the Duet 2 Maestro version, but not in the Duet 2 WiFi/Ethernet.
@DueDue said in 12864 Modification:
It looks to me that the trend in the forums all over is to direct the person asking the question to some link.
If any question can be answered with a link to documentation, that is the correct approach to minimise time spent on support. If the link doesn't completely answer the question, the original poster can always come back and ask more questions, and if necessary the documentation can be updated/improved. That saves everyone time.
I think what went wrong here for the OP is that, by asking about editing the firmware, a level of knowledge was assumed by those answering. It might be simpler in Marlin (because it forces you to build the firmware every single time you want to change something, but at least the Arduino IDE is easy to set up), but for 99% of users, RepRapFirmware doesn't need to be compiled by the user; it is configured by editing a text file on the SD card, config.g. Setting up and using the build environment for RepRapFirmware is not trivial; I tried a couple of years ago, didn't get it working, haven't needed to try since. So the assumption is that, when someone asks about it, they know what they're doing. Asking questions such as "do I need to compile [after I've edited the firmware source files]" does rather make it sound like this may be a difficult task for the OP. It also seems like the OP skim-read (or didn't read) the links, so didn't quite appreciate the complexity of the task, eliciting the responses from more experienced users.
If anyone has issues with this thread, I'm happy to moderate it, but generally we let things stand. Send me a PM, but note support is not provided by PM.
Ian
