Parallel Cable IV does not work with parallel to usb cable

Andreas Ehliar wrote:
> To be honest, at this point I prefer to use XC3SProg
> http://www.rogerstech.force9.co.uk/xc3sprog/index.html
> in Linux. Sure, it is rather slow since it uses the parallel cable IV
> in cable III mode, but it feels much more stable in Linux than impact does.
>

What I would really like something that can write Xilinx .ACE files.
The impact from Foundation 6.2 is terribly slow, and from Webpack8.1
is pretty flakey. (It wrote ace files everywhere but where I wanted
them.)

-- 
Steve Williams                "The woods are lovely, dark and deep.
steve at icarus.com           But I have promises to keep,
http://www.icarus.com         and lines to code before I sleep,
http://www.picturel.com       And lines to code before I sleep."

Stephen Williams wrote:
> Andreas Ehliar wrote:
>> To be honest, at this point I prefer to use XC3SProg
>> http://www.rogerstech.force9.co.uk/xc3sprog/index.html
>> in Linux. Sure, it is rather slow since it uses the parallel cable IV
>> in cable III mode, but it feels much more stable in Linux than impact does.
>>
> 
> What I would really like something that can write Xilinx .ACE files.
> The impact from Foundation 6.2 is terribly slow, and from Webpack8.1
> is pretty flakey. (It wrote ace files everywhere but where I wanted
> them.)
> 

I'll agree that the interface is not particularly intuitive, but the 
main limitation I see is that the ace files must always be placed two 
directories deep. I've used Impact from ISE7.1 on Linux regularly, and 
had no problems at all. I haven't used the 8.1 version much, but a quick 
test seems to indicate that it works the same.

Arrgg... I just noticed that the ipf project files have switched from 
plain text in version 7.1 to binary in version 8.1.

Hey Xilinx, please take a poll of your paying customers. We don't want 
binary project files!

Duane Clark wrote:
> Stephen Williams wrote:

>> What I would really like something that can write Xilinx .ACE files.
>> The impact from Foundation 6.2 is terribly slow, and from Webpack8.1
>> is pretty flakey. (It wrote ace files everywhere but where I wanted
>> them.)
>>
> 
> I'll agree that the interface is not particularly intuitive, but the
> main limitation I see is that the ace files must always be placed two
> directories deep. I've used Impact from ISE7.1 on Linux regularly, and
> had no problems at all. I haven't used the 8.1 version much, but a quick
> test seems to indicate that it works the same.

When I wave my hands over it just right, it does. But for a few days
I found it writing jtr/jtr/jtr.ace files in the most surprising
places, including in jtr/jtr/jtr/jtr/jtr/jtr.ace, $HOME/jtr/jtr/jtr.ace,
$(CWD)/jtr/jtr/jtr.ace, and a few other places I haven't thought of.
I'm still occasionally finding jtr.ace files here and there.

> Arrgg... I just noticed that the ipf project files have switched from
> plain text in version 7.1 to binary in version 8.1.
> 
> Hey Xilinx, please take a poll of your paying customers. We don't want
> binary project files!

And then there's that.

-- 
Steve Williams                "The woods are lovely, dark and deep.
steve at icarus.com           But I have promises to keep,
http://www.icarus.com         and lines to code before I sleep,
http://www.picturel.com       And lines to code before I sleep."