Re: [Fwd: Moving event generator and event receiver record support out of base]

[Andrew Johnson <anj@aps.anl.gov>]

Does the SLS event system support make use of the er* and eg* record 
types from Base, or do they have their own record types?  If APS is the 
only site actually using these records then we should definately remove 
them, but if sites using the SLS event boards rely on the record types 
then they probably should remain.  Timo, would you like to comment on 
Dayle's suggestion?

- Andrew

Marty Kraimer wrote:
> Andrew Johnson wrote:
>
> > I agree with Dayle that we should remove these records from base, 
> > especially as they're already unbundled into modules/timing/apsEvent, 
> > but I'm not 100% convinced we should do it in the middle of a major 
> > release number - any comments either way from the floor?
> >
> > - Andrew
> >
> > -------- Original Message --------
> > Subject: Moving event generator and event receiver record support out 
> > of base
> > Date: Fri, 09 Sep 2005 17:09:49 -0700 (PDT)
> > From: Dayle Kotturi <dayle@slac.stanford.edu>
> > To: Andrew Johnson <anj@aps.anl.gov>
> >
> > Hi Andrew,
> >
> > Can I put in a vote to pull er*Record and eg*Record support from 
> > base/src/rec
> > in the next release? It's hardware support and doesn't belong with soft
> > ioc records. It's better in the site packages evg and evr.
> >
> > Dayle
>
>
> The device and driver support has already been removed from base for the 
> next 3.14 release.
> This means that applications that use the APS event system already have 
> to make some changes.
> This let them also get egRecord, egeventRecord, erRecord, and 
> ereventRecord from modules/timing/apsEvent.
>
> As I recall at least some of these were modified for the SLS and later 
> event systems.
>
> Marty


--
English probably arose from Normans trying to pick up Saxon girls.