Upgrading OS or WebPack

Hei,

I will start developing FPGA applications with WebPack. My problem is
that my OS is WinNT, which is not supported by WebPack 5.2i. I've got a
CD laying round here with WebPack version 4.2WP0.0. 

Can anybody tell me if the advantages of v. 5.2i are so much that
upgrading to Win2000 really is necessary?

My application will run on a Spartan-II device. Clock speed wil not be
an issue, but efficient use of logic cells might be.

Thanks,

Aart

Aart van Beuzekom wrote:
> 
> Hei,
> 
> I will start developing FPGA applications with WebPack. My problem is
> that my OS is WinNT, which is not supported by WebPack 5.2i. I've got a
> CD laying round here with WebPack version 4.2WP0.0.
> 
> Can anybody tell me if the advantages of v. 5.2i are so much that
> upgrading to Win2000 really is necessary?
> 
> My application will run on a Spartan-II device. Clock speed wil not be
> an issue, but efficient use of logic cells might be.

I can tell you why I upgraded from NT to W2K ... no support for USB.

Rob

Aart van Beuzekom wrote:
> 
> Hei,
> 
> I will start developing FPGA applications with WebPack. My problem is
> that my OS is WinNT, which is not supported by WebPack 5.2i. I've got a
> CD laying round here with WebPack version 4.2WP0.0.
> 
> Can anybody tell me if the advantages of v. 5.2i are so much that
> upgrading to Win2000 really is necessary?
> 
> My application will run on a Spartan-II device. Clock speed wil not be
> an issue, but efficient use of logic cells might be.

There are other reasons to upgrade to Win2000 and it can be fairly
painless.  If you are interested, email me. 

-- 

Rick "rickman" Collins

rick.collins@XYarius.com
Ignore the reply address. To email me use the above address with the XY
removed.

Arius - A Signal Processing Solutions Company
Specializing in DSP and FPGA design      URL http://www.arius.com
4 King Ave                               301-682-7772 Voice
Frederick, MD 21701-3110                 301-682-7666 FAX

yes, I am aware of other advantages of running W2K, but the major
disadvatage is that this also implies buying a new PC and using a lot of
time installing all current programs again. If possible, I want to stick
to NT until I've got time to install a new OS (which probably means that
I will run NT as long as I work here :-)).

Although it is not supported, I installed WebPack 5.2i under NT and the
example program (traffic light) runs fine. Does anybody foresee where
the problems may rise?

Thanks,

Aart

Rob Judd wrote:
> 
> Aart van Beuzekom wrote:
> >
> > Hei,
> >
> > I will start developing FPGA applications with WebPack. My problem is
> > that my OS is WinNT, which is not supported by WebPack 5.2i. I've got a
> > CD laying round here with WebPack version 4.2WP0.0.
> >
> > Can anybody tell me if the advantages of v. 5.2i are so much that
> > upgrading to Win2000 really is necessary?
> >
> > My application will run on a Spartan-II device. Clock speed wil not be
> > an issue, but efficient use of logic cells might be.
> 
> I can tell you why I upgraded from NT to W2K ... no support for USB.
> 
> Rob

"Aart van Beuzekom" <aart@westcontrol.com> wrote in message
news:3F374368.2FADD7D0@westcontrol.com...
> yes, I am aware of other advantages of running W2K, but the major
> disadvatage is that this also implies buying a new PC and using a lot of
> time installing all current programs again. If possible, I want to stick
> to NT until I've got time to install a new OS (which probably means that
> I will run NT as long as I work here :-)).
>
> Although it is not supported, I installed WebPack 5.2i under NT and the
> example program (traffic light) runs fine. Does anybody foresee where
> the problems may rise?
>

At a guess I think you should be fine except for impact via a parallel
cable.

Ralph

Stephen Williams wrote:
> 
> I am not generally a Windows user, but when forced by circumstances,
> I find that NT is a bit moldy, Windows 2000 is OK, and XP is spooky.
> I would suggest upgrading to Windows 2000 while (if!) you can still
> get it, then stay away from XP in perpetuity.

 I would concurr.
Generally Win2000 has good dos/batch support, which you tend to need
on engineering PCs. 
 Wrinkles I've seen so far in Win2000 in eng. development: 

 Within batch files, >file.log fails, but >>file.log works - go
figure....
( first should redirect to file, 2nd is same, but appends the file )

 Some Programmers editors launch DOS apps better than others in Win2000.
Still characterising that one....

-jg

Jim Granville wrote:
> 
> Stephen Williams wrote:
> >
> > I am not generally a Windows user, but when forced by circumstances,
> > I find that NT is a bit moldy, Windows 2000 is OK, and XP is spooky.
> > I would suggest upgrading to Windows 2000 while (if!) you can still
> > get it, then stay away from XP in perpetuity.
> 
>  I would concurr.
> Generally Win2000 has good dos/batch support, which you tend to need
> on engineering PCs.
>  Wrinkles I've seen so far in Win2000 in eng. development:
> 
>  Within batch files, >file.log fails, but >>file.log works - go
> figure....
> ( first should redirect to file, 2nd is same, but appends the file )
> 
>  Some Programmers editors launch DOS apps better than others in Win2000.
> Still characterising that one....

As long as we are mentioning Win2k for running FPGA tools, I thought I
would mention that Xilinx does not support the W2k service packs beyond
2.  Also, there is a nasty bug running around at the moment that
requires a patch from MicroSoft.  If you use Win2k, you can get the
patch here...

http://www.microsoft.com/technet/treeview/default.asp?url=/technet/security/bulletin/MS03-026.asp

I just got this bug.  Turns out the virus detection files were just made
available today for my AV software.  Even so, I have no idea how I got
it.  I never run strange exe's or other potentially executable files. 
Heck, I don't even open email from a lot of sources.  

-- 

Rick "rickman" Collins

rick.collins@XYarius.com
Ignore the reply address. To email me use the above address with the XY
removed.

Arius - A Signal Processing Solutions Company
Specializing in DSP and FPGA design      URL http://www.arius.com
4 King Ave                               301-682-7772 Voice
Frederick, MD 21701-3110                 301-682-7666 FAX

On Fri, 08 Aug 2003 11:35:05 +0200, Aart van Beuzekom wrote:

> Hei,
> 
> I will start developing FPGA applications with WebPack. My problem is that
> my OS is WinNT, which is not supported by WebPack 5.2i. I've got a CD
> laying round here with WebPack version 4.2WP0.0.
> 
> Can anybody tell me if the advantages of v. 5.2i are so much that
> upgrading to Win2000 really is necessary?
> 
> My application will run on a Spartan-II device. Clock speed wil not be an
> issue, but efficient use of logic cells might be.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Aart

Upgrade to a real operating system, Linux. The 5.2 tools work fine using
wine on Linux. Next month the 6.1 release will run natively on Linux.

rickman wrote:

>"B. Joshua Rosen" wrote:
>  
>
>>On Fri, 08 Aug 2003 11:35:05 +0200, Aart van Beuzekom wrote:
>>
>>    
>>
>>>Hei,
>>>
>>>I will start developing FPGA applications with WebPack. My problem is that
>>>my OS is WinNT, which is not supported by WebPack 5.2i. I've got a CD
>>>laying round here with WebPack version 4.2WP0.0.
>>>
>>>Can anybody tell me if the advantages of v. 5.2i are so much that
>>>upgrading to Win2000 really is necessary?
>>>
>>>My application will run on a Spartan-II device. Clock speed wil not be an
>>>issue, but efficient use of logic cells might be.
>>>
>>>Thanks,
>>>
>>>Aart
>>>      
>>>
>>Upgrade to a real operating system, Linux. The 5.2 tools work fine using
>>wine on Linux. Next month the 6.1 release will run natively on Linux.
>>    
>>
>
>Correct me if I am wrong, but this is not Linux exactly.  It is Redhat
>and only one specific version of Redhat if I am not mistaken.
>
Redhat 7.3 and 8.0 will be officially supported.

>  If you
>are running anything else, the tools are not supported.  I am not trying
>to knock Xilinx, I just want it to be clear that there are supported
>version limitations under *any* OS. 
>
>I have been told by email that Win2K is supported after SP2, it is just
>the documentation that says SP2 only.  The problems with using the
>download cable has been worked out and the new version 6.0 or 6.1, which
>ever it is, will document the wider version support.  
>
Yes, 6.1i will be officially support on SP2, 3, and 4.

Steve

>
>  
>

"Steve Lass" <lass@xilinx.com> wrote in message
news:3F39816B.2060200@xilinx.com...
> rickman wrote:
> >
> >Correct me if I am wrong, but this is not Linux exactly.  It is Redhat
> >and only one specific version of Redhat if I am not mistaken.
> >
> Redhat 7.3 and 8.0 will be officially supported.
>

Exactly - it will not officially support Linux, but only two particular
versions of one distribution.  Redhat is one of the more popular distros in
the US, but it is not the most popular (at least, for desktops/workstations)
in many other parts of the world, and you are not even looking at the most
recent versions.  Before you can really say you official support Linux,
rather than just a couple of specific versions, you should be happy to
support installation on at least Redhat, Suse, Mandrake, Debian for several
versions, including the latest ones.  This will also mean you can be
confident of it working on almost all systems, except perhaps very old or
obscurely configured ones, although no one would expect a supplier to test
their softare on every combination!

However, even support for just a couple of distro versions is a big step
forward, and we can hope it is the start of an on-going commitment to linux
support for the tools.  Perhaps once the webpack is available for linux,
you'll provide information and guidelines on installation on other distros
that are not officially supported by xilinx - you can be sure there will be
users willing to test it for you.