NIDAQmx on Fedora 9

[ninevoltz]

Here's a patch for NIKAL 1.7 (NIDAQmx 3.1) to use with kernel 2.6.25. You still have to modify modpost.c in the kernel source to allow for the enormous symbol names in nikal.John


nikal-1.7-linux-2.6.25.patch:
http://forums.ni.com/attachments/ni/250/40433/1/nikal-1.7-linux-2.6.25.patch

[death]

HiAfter a brief period of not using NI boards, I needed to run on F9. This is just a quick note to say that you don't need to recompile the whole kernel to get modpost. Just tell make to keep going (use the -k flag)yum install kernel-headers kernel-develcd /usr/src/kernels/$(uname -r)sed -i "s/#define SZ 500/#define SZ 1024/" scripts/mod/modpost.cmake -k modules_prepareThen you still need the version patch...cd include/linux/mv version.h version.h.origcat utsrelease.h version.h.orig > version.hcd ../asm/ln -s asm-offsets.h asm_offsets.hadd ninevoltz's nikal patch and runupdateNIdrivers

[JohnNavratil]

Back after a year of playing with a PCI-6221 on Fedora 7, I have a new project using a PCI-6224 on Fedora 9.  I installed NIKAL1.8 and took a look at the 1.7 patch with an eye to converting it to 1.8.  The only apparent effect of the patch was to add "pciDriver->enable_wake = NULL;" as it appeared that NI has added code to properly define IRQF_DISABLED and IRQF_SHARED if they are not present.  (The patch also changed the license to GPL). However, there is no longer a structure element named 'enable_wake'.  So I backed out the patch, ran updateNIDrivers and rebooted, whereupon 'nilsdev --verbose' reported seeing my PCI-6224 card.  I haven't started any coding and I still need to straighten out libOSMesa.so.4 on this new machine before the test panels will run, but could it be that patching is no longer needed?

Looking over the utility.sh script it appears NI is looking for 'utsrelease.h' as well as 'asm-offsets.h' so manipulations of these source files appears redundant.  I backed out these changes and updateNIDrivers seemed to work fine.  I assume the '#define SZ 1024' patch to modpost.c is still required, but was unsure how to back out the change to test this.

As it stands, it appears the procedure to get NIKAL 1.8 onto Fedora 9, kernel 2.6.25 is...

Download NIDAQ800_RedHat.iso (NI-DAQmx 8.0) from http://joule.ni.com/nidu/cds/view/p/id/375/lang/en, and NIKAL18.iso from http://joule.ni.com/nidu/cds/view/p/id/1075/lang/en.  Install kernel-devel and kernel-headers packages.

cd /usr/src/kernels/$(uname -r)
sed -i "s/#define SZ 500/#define SZ 1024/" scripts/mod/modpost.c
make -k modules_prepare

mount -o loop <path-to-iso>/NIDAQ800_RedHat.iso /mnt
cd /mnt
./INSTALL
<< Accepted license, installed without LabView and did not reboot. >>
umount /mnt

mount -o loop <path-to-iso>/NIKAL18.iso /mnt
cd /mnt
./INSTALL
<< Accepted license, took default installation point. >>
umount /mnt

cd /usr/local/natinst
updateNIDrivers
<< Accepted generous offer to reboot>>

nilsdev --verbose<< Successfully reports PCI-6224 as dev1 >> DISCLAIMER:  I discovered this after mucking about with a pristine system.  If I were really worth anything, at all, I would test all this on a fresh build of a machine.  Perhaps later :smileywink: Kudos to NI for combing all this out!!! -- John Navratil

[ninevoltz]

I used Fedora 9 for about a week, then I wiped my drive and went back to Fedora 8. Fedora 9 (KDE 4.x specifically) is horrible. My system kept freezing up, the majority of the KDE 4 apps are incomplete or unstable. Fedora 9 should have never been released to the general public. I wouldn't recommend using it if you value system stability.  John 

[JohnNavratil]

To get the test panels working..... yum install mesa-libOSMesa
ln -s /usr/lib/libOSMesa.so.6.5.3  /usr/lib/libOSMesa.so.4
DAQmxTestPanels
 

[JohnNavratil]

Your Fedora 9 cautionary tale is not without merit.  This is my fourth try with it, and this time simply because I was handed a system with F9 on it.  Yesterday morning I would not have considered it, but when I upgraded it I noticed that the repositories had been upgraded from 8.92 to 9.0, the update went smoothly and, so far, I've had no difficulty. I donate the first pint.  More than that and I am back to Fedora 8.  But as long as it appears stable, I'm willing to keep going.