Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


JKSH last won the day on June 6 2021

JKSH had the most liked content!

1 Follower

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Location
    Western Australia

LabVIEW Information

  • Version
    LabVIEW 2020
  • Since

Recent Profile Visitors

8,437 profile views

JKSH's Achievements

  1. This announcement might be of interest: https://create.vi/ni-and-jki-partnering-on-package-management-in-labview-d243b13ae3a6 "Features in VIPM Pro 2023+ (Paid): NI Third Party Licensing and Activation Toolkit (TPLAT) Integration"
  2. Which one? NI has a few different web servers: https://forums.ni.com/t5/SystemLink/Relationship-between-quot-NI-Web-Server-quot-quot-NI-System-Web/td-p/3662789 If you're using the new "NI Web Server" rather than the old "NI Application Web Server", try asking at the SystemLink forum.
  3. Try F2 or F12 too? Other than that, Google "Windows 7 lost password". There are various hacks around; I've never tried them with WES7 but I'd imagine that some should work.
  4. Yes. The RT code gets compiled into an .rtexe file which is loaded by the LabVIEW runtime engine, while the FPGA code gets compiled into a bitfile which is loaded into the FPGA. You can use User-Defined Variables, or you can use Controls/Indicators on your top-level FPGA VI: https://www.ni.com/docs/en-US/bundle/labview-fpga-module/page/lvfpgaconcepts/pfi_data_transfer.html For your slow use-case, it probably doesn't matter which one you pick. I suggest you get something going for the Scan Engine first. Add your FPGA after. Not sure what your question is here, sorry. Just search for "9202" in the NI Example Finder and run an example on your cRIO.
  5. Yes, it's called Hybrid Mode: https://knowledge.ni.com/KnowledgeArticleDetails?id=kA03q000000YIDfCAO&l=en-US That's a shame. 100Hz is definitely possible with the Scan Engine (on supported hardware).
  6. No, it doesn't. You can use 32-bit LabVIEW to develop software for your 64-bit cRIO. In fact, 32-bit LabVIEW supports more drivers/toolkits for cRIO than 64-bit LabVIEW. Only if you want to write FPGA code. Do you strictly need to write custom code for the FPGA? If not, then I suggest you skip this. FPGA programming is subtly different and more complex than regular RT programming. If you're new to cRIOs and you only have 1.5 months, then you could end up taking a huge percentage of that time trying to figure out how to use the FPGA. So my question is: What is the maximum sample rate that your AI, AO, and DO need?
  7. NI MAX is for testing DAQmx hardware (like CompactDAQ, for example). DAQmx support was added to CompactRIO-904x and 905x, but cRIO-903x is not supported. You only have Scan Engine and FPGA, so you cannot test your hardware with NI MAX. Use the NI Example Finder: https://knowledge.ni.com/KnowledgeArticleDetails?id=kA03q000000YIKbCAO&l=en-US Good luck!
  8. These warnings look weird to me. The problematic functions are all declared in zmq.h which is included by zmq_labview.c, so you should have no "implicit declarations". I haven't used this library before, but I suspect something went wrong during compilation of lvzmq64.so. You can check it with chrpath --list. If it exists, you can change it with chrpath --replace.
  9. In the beginning, "permanent"/"perpetual" activations were exactly that: You activate it once, and then it would stay activated forever (unless you deliberately deactivate/uninstall it, or your machine dies). A few years ago, NI's activation server changed its behaviour: After you activate something, it would stay activated until early August. Even if you have a perpetual commercial (non-subscription, non-academic) license, you have to re-activate every August. It's a weird system: If I activated at the end of July, I would need to re-activate again within 2 weeks. I don't know if Academic licenses were treated any differently or not (my company had a Developer Suite), but your descriptions sounded like what we had to go through.
  10. As someone who used this for a large-ish project -- after 9 years as a full-time LabVIEW programmer at a Silver Alliance Partner -- I cannot recommend this route. Neither can others who replied to my post. Your future self will thank you.
  11. What is the value of these requests? (are they from major customers?) What would happen if you removed the feature completely? I have no experience with something like this, but @Neil Pate's JS suggestion sounds workable.
  12. Your last Wikipedia link has a link to the answer(s) 😁 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World's_second_oldest_profession
  13. You mentioned a number of different permissive licenses; Shaun and Rolf also mentioned copyleft licenses. Here is a simplistic ranking of the "forcefulness" of different open-source licenses, from most copyleft (#1) to most permissive (#5): GPL LGPL MPL 2.0 MIT/BSD-3/Apache 2.0 BSD-0/Unlicense (virtually Public Domain) That's a fair statement. I agree with Rolf: In terms of the common permissive licenses, MIT, BSD-3, and Apache 2.0 are very very similar in intent. Your project will probably end up in the same place no matter which of these 3 you pick (unless you or your project become super famous, as you said). Apache 2.0 is considered more complicated that the others though. BSD-0 and Unlicense are even more permissive; they are virtually at the level of public domain. Apache 2.0 has a similar clause. How strong is strong for you? GPL is the ultimate copyleft license: all software that uses a GPL library must also be published under GPL. You can release your software under any license you want if it only uses LGPL libraries, but you must still allow your users to swap out the LGPL'ed part for a different version. This makes it difficult to use a LabVIEW library under LGPL, because it's not trivial to write a LabVIEW application that lets users replace certain VIs. MPL 2.0 is a middle ground between LGPL and MIT. And it is easy for LabVIEW devs to use MPL 2.0 libraries. The difference exists because GPL is primarily concerned about freedoms for the end-users, while the permissive licenses are more about making developers' lives easier. LGPL does not require you to open-source your code at all.
  14. Perhaps a mod/admin can fork this thread? (The last several posts have been about SystemLink authentication) My apologies, I just realized that I was conflating SystemLink and NI Web Server myself. As far as I know, NI Web Server -- which can also be used for LabVIEW-based web services without SystemLink -- uses LDAP + Local Windows accounts like you said, plus Microsoft Active Directory only: https://www.ni.com/docs/en-US/bundle/ni-web-server-18.2-20.1-feature/page/choosing-an-authentication-setting.html "Regular" SystemLink hooks into the NI Web Server for authentication. SystemLink Enterprise (the one announced at NIWeek 2022, not the older releases which were also touted as enterprise-level) uses completely different technologies, from what I gather from the presentations. I haven't been able to find any documentation for SystemLink Enterprise yet. I don't know of a solution for this either; we'll have to see if SystemLink Enterprise offers anything. Try asking at https://forums.ni.com/t5/SystemLink/bd-p/1020
  15. To be clear: That NIWeek 2019 video doesn't contain any SystemLink at all. SystemLink asks us to use its integrated 3rd-party user management tools, not to implement our own. In other words, SystemLink doesn't want us to follow that video! I agree (and NI agrees) with y'all that we should not be rolling our own user management system. (This applies to all software, no matter what price it is)
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.