[Stevos758]

I would like to set up a dual boot so I can play with path pilot more.

Think its possibly to set up a dual boot using a regular install with linux CNC then overwrite the linux install with path pilot?

[jcposada]

While I have not done it myself, I suspect using a bootloader as you describe is possible if you want to install both operating systems on the same hard drive.

I don't really want that and had a spare SATA drive laying around so I installed that and will use BIOS to boot one or the other - after all I do not anticipate to move back and forth that often once the initial kinks get worked out for PathPilot.

[Stevos758]

While I have not done it myself, I suspect using a bootloader as you describe is possible if you want to install both operating systems on the same hard drive.

I don't really want that and had a spare SATA drive laying around so I installed that and will use BIOS to boot one or the other - after all I do not anticipate to move back and forth that often once the initial kinks get worked out for PathPilot.

Agreed. If anyone tries this before I get to it please post here with results.

[shred]

You will have to be very careful to keep tool tables and similar system state coherent between the two systems-- if you have an ATC, I wouldn't even bother trying.

[Stevos758]

You will have to be very careful to keep tool tables and similar system state coherent between the two systems-- if you have an ATC, I wouldn't even bother trying.

In theory, wouldn't all that be stored on each separate partition?

[jcposada]

Yes, but that is not what Shred means. He actually brings up a really good point, which is that the tool table information will not be sync'ed between the two installations/controllers, so if while running some code in PathPilot we break and end mill (and re measure that tool) or add a new tool to the tool table, the new tool information will not automatically be entered in the tool table for Mach, so we'd need to keep close tabs on that to avoid headaches.

Make sense?

[Stevos758]

Yes, but that is not what Shred means. He actually brings up a really good point, which is that the tool table information will not be sync'ed between the two installations/controllers, so if while running some code in PathPilot we break and end mill (and re measure that tool) or add a new tool to the tool table, the new tool information will not automatically be entered in the tool table for Mach, so we'd need to keep close tabs on that to avoid headaches.

Make sense?

That makes sense. Good call. I would have probably overlooked that. Crash Boom!

[shred]

That is what I meant. Machine state is stored with the controller, not with the machine itself.

I didn't think hard enough about it and installed the early beta with an ATC tray full of tools..... that PP had no idea were there. That was fun to fix.

[phoneman]

Shred
How are you working around the bugs in probing and setting work offsets. Is tool 1 the master tool?

Dave

[shred]

I haven't messed with the built-in probing routines. I set zeros and offsets with a Haimer 3D sensor which I declare for my own reasons as tool #99 and set tool lengths offline.

The "master tool" as-such in this scheme is the Haimer. Put it in, G43, dial it to zero on the part or fixture and it's good to go.