On Tue, 2008-02-19 at 12:44 -0500, Dro Kulix wrote:
> - Can I assume that the components of an FPGA setup are no more than 
> synthesis software (VHDL or Verilog), a sort of hardware programmer (or 
> analogue thereof--what would it be called?), and a 
> breakout/demonstration board with an in-circuit programming header?

Pretty much. Depending on how you plan to do things add a SIM to the
mix. It's always best to put your code through sim before going to the
real device.

Once in the real device either a logic analyzer or one of the "include
in your code" LA solutions (i.e. Identify or ChipScope) may be
necessary, it depends on how complex your design is, how fast you want
to go, etc. 

Personally I try to do things in such a way that I only need to pull out
the logic analyzer for those really nitty gritty problems.

> - Any recommendations on which of the above would be the cheapest with 
> which to start out?  For a given product, assuming nothing except the 
> equipment already necessary to work with PICs and other simple 
> circuitry, what would be a minimal BOM for getting anything coherent out 
> of the FPGA?

There are many dev boards out there, choosing one is really up to what
you want to do. The thing that does annoy me is they pretty much all
have the programming hardware on board. The problem with this is you
still need to get a programming cable when you want to do other things,
and those can be pricey.

I do recommend staying away from the "simple" home made programming
cables, the same issues that make them glitchy for PICs exist here.

> - Is there a significant presence of FOSS and/or Linux-compatible 
> synthesis and burning software?

Absolutely. Many of the tools work on Linux (and in my experience are
usually slightly faster on Linux).

TTYL
-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist