Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

jMAVSim without GUI #59

Closed
GregoireH opened this issue May 5, 2017 · 6 comments · Fixed by #105
Closed

jMAVSim without GUI #59

GregoireH opened this issue May 5, 2017 · 6 comments · Fixed by #105

Comments

@GregoireH
Copy link

Hello,

Thanks to this post: http://discuss.px4.io/t/lightweight-or-command-line-sitl-simulation-options/2285
Modifying Visualizer3D.java3, and change setVisible(true) to
setVisible(false).

I could run SITL using jMAVSim without the GUI as my low computational power computer was having troubles running it properly.

Do you know if most of PX4 users are using the graphics ?
Or if most of us are just wasting CPU with jMAVSim fency graphics...

I was wondering if we could set a parameter for this in order to be able to specify that we want to turn off graphics, without having to edit and compile jMAVSim .
Do you think it could be feasible and that some people could benefit from that ?

looking forward hearing from you.
Best

@julianoes
Copy link

Hi, thanks for the note. I think this would be worthwhile to add. Possibly it should be consistent with the HEADLESS=1 mode that you can use for the Gazebo simulation.

@julianoes julianoes self-assigned this May 5, 2017
@julianoes julianoes removed their assignment Sep 13, 2018
@julianoes
Copy link

This would still be nice, someday. FYI @JonasVautherin.

@JonasVautherin
Copy link

If I remember correctly, I tried that a few months ago. But the fix proposed here was only disabling the graphics rendering and not making it truly headless (somehow it still needed an X server to be running, so I could not run that, say, in a headless docker).

@ekatzfey
Copy link

Did this ever get resolved? I would really like to be able to run this in a headless docker.

Thanks!

@hamishwillee
Copy link

@ekatzfey No, it did not. We'd happily accept a PR!

Note, FWIW

@katzfey
Copy link

katzfey commented Aug 18, 2019

I submitted a PR.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

6 participants