Re: Pic-Kit 3 and Linux?

On Wednesday 07 October 2009, Joe Pfeiffer wrote:
> Noel Henson writes:
> >On Wednesday 07 October 2009, Noel Henson wrote:
> >> On Wednesday 07 October 2009, Xiaofan Chen wrote:
> >> > On Wed, Oct 7, 2009 at 11:51 PM, Joe Pfeiffer
> >> > <[email protected]>
> >>
> >> wrote:
> >> > > I see code to use Microchip's PICkit 2 under Linux is available
> >> > > from Microchip.  Meanwhile, they are pushing hard to use their
> >> > > PICKit 3 for new designs.  Does the PICKit 3 use the same command
> >> > > set as PICKit 2, or is there otherwise a way to use it with
> >> > > Linux?
> >> >
> >> > PICkit 3 does not use the same command set as PICkit 2. Its
> >> > firmware structure is also different from PICkit 2 (more like ICD
> >> > 2). So as of now it is not working under native Linux.
> >> >
> >> > You can of course use Virtual Machines and Windows to get
> >> > it working under Linux.
> >> >
> >> > I am not so sure when this situation will change. As of now,
> >> > PICkit 3 is not as good as PICkit 2, even under Windows.
> >> > Ref: http://www.microchip.com/forums/tm.aspx?m=450226
> >>
> >> Just a question... Do really we need an inexpensive, Linux-capable
> >> PIC programmer?
> >>
> >> Noel
> >
> >Whoa, it must be getting late. That should read, "do we really need an
> >inexpensive, Linux-capable PIC programmer?"
>
> "Need" is an awfully strong word.  If you were to dilute your question
> to "would we really, really prefer to have an inexpensive PIC
> programmer we can use without either rebooting to Windows or starting
> a VM", my answer would be "yes".
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

The reason I ask is that I'd have no problem designing a universal PIC 
programmer for us all to use. In the past I needed to create one that 
worked for a particular line of remote controls for groups. It could 
program the Atmel (which is SPI-like) and Microchip (different for each 
family + HV Vpp). If the complexity of the programming 'OS' as Microchip 
calls it is removed from the programmer, or rather if the programmer only 
knew about the physical layer protocol, then the programming algorithm for 
each family could reside on the host where it is very easy to change.

If I were to design one, I'd probably take the cheapest PIC part with and 
SCI port, add a charge pump for Vpp and throw on a USB-to-serial IC and 
call it done. But I'll only put in the effort if there's interest.

Noel

-- 

------------------------------------------------------------------
  Noel Henson
  www.noels-lab.com	Chips, firmware and embedded systems
  www.vimoutliner.org	Work fast. Think well.