Labview on LINUX - reliability issue ?

[Igor 290]

Hello,

I have a problem about the stability of LV under LINUX - it blocks at some moments, mainly
by mouse clicking or during initial loading, and
sometimes blocks me whole RPM, so I have to kill it "externally". It is not happenned when the VI is already loaded and running - working quite well.
Does somebody have some tips to resolve - probably LV runs in conflict with some daemon ?

I have LV 5.1 and Red Hat Linux release 6.1 (Cartman) Kernel 2.2.12-20 on two processors - Pentium Celleron 366 MHz and other
even older Pentium 200 MHz , both have the same problem...


Thanks, Igor

[SergKr]

Igor,
To my experience this mostly happened with LV5 because of X and graphics libraries installed and configured in your system. Good idea, suggested by NI at some time, was to go through debugger to trace calls to libraries and it's functions. This will give you some additional info of where to search for the wrong function call. Some time I was captured one library function wich was modified by the third party and replaces the original one. Reordering these libraries in ldconfig solved the problem.

Send this tracking info to NI linux support to help them explain a problem to you.

I'm trying to use LV on Linux built from scratch and with simplest and reliable window manager or without it at all. This gives much more reliability to critical applications.

[Igor 290]

Hi, Sergey,

thanks a lot, but could you comment more precisely - what means simplest WM. Sorry, in my work I need to use some VIs in one time so
I need to use some WM as well.

thanks you, Igor.

[SergKr]

Igor,

In my case I've used twm, fvwm and clones like fvwm2. These are simple ones and very stabil. On my experimental Linux box I'm using fvwm2 and it has the all most neccessary window management functions. To my sence, Linux for reliable and critical applications should be built as simple as possible without huge amount of unneccessary packages installed usually for the programming or office workstation.
This way I mean by saying "simplest". Simplest means clear to understanding, control and maintain.
There are several more WM's, stated as small and simple, but I was not tried them yet. These two mentioned above suite my applications needs enough for now and behave perfectly with LabVIEW.

Regards,

[Johannes Niess]

Igor writes:

> Hi, Sergey,
>
> thanks a lot, but could you comment more precisely - what means
> simplest WM. Sorry, in my work I need to use some VIs in one time so
> I need to use some WM as well.
>
> thanks you, Igor.

Hi,

I've tested LV 5.1f1 under KDE 2.0. It displays the splash screen and
dies with an error message regarding the window manager. Details are
available on request. I assume that LV uses a non standard way to
communicate with the window manager.

Johannes Nieß

[SergKr]

Johannes,

This was the reason I was disagree for now to use LV with KDE2.0. I'has significant differences inside. These differences seemed step into the future for me, but for real applications with LabVIEW it's not good for me now and need some time and bug fixing inside.
To my knowledge, LabVIEW use X basic client functions and it's mainly enough for LV. I've experimented a lot searching a minimal set of X libraries required by LV to run. It requires amasingly low amount of these libraries in system. So I've made a decision that LV mostly incapsulate most of it's power inside - I mean in it's own libraries and binaries. For me it's not bad, because most Linuxes which I was tried to put under LabVIEW was functioning good, only ker
nel and basic X libraries was an issue.
At last I've found that LabVIEW functioning mostly as a normal (means standard) X Window client, so not agree with you.KDE 2.o uses non-standard way to communicate to LV.
I'm not quite good yet understanding LV Linux insights, so this is only my own user experiments and thoughts.

Glad to see some Linux man here.
Best Regards
Sergey