Ticket5481 all iocs at least 2 numbers

[LilithCole]

Description of work

Added second numbered IOC to various IOCs

To test

partially, #5481

Acceptance criteria

Second IOCs added correctly

---

Code Review

• A copy of the manual has been placed on the shared drive
• Pertitent information has been stored in the wiki
• Does the IOC conform to IBEX standards?
  • PV naming.
  • Disable records
  • Record simulation
  • Finishing touches
• If an OPI has been modified, does it conform to the style guidelines?
• Do the IOC and support module conform to the new build guidelines
• Have the changes been recorded appropriately in the release notes?
• Is the device's flow control setting correct? For most devices flow control should be OFF.

Functional Tests

• IOC responds correctly in:
  • Devsim mode
  • Recsim mode
  • Real device, if available
• Supplementary IOCs (..._0n where n>1) run correctly
• Log files do not report undefined macros (serach for macLib: macro to find instances of macLib: macro [macro name] is undefined...

Final steps

• Update the IOC submodule in the main EPICS repo. See Git workflow page for details.
• Reviewer has moved the release notes entry for this ticket in the "Changes merged into master" section

[Tom-Willemsen]

None of the additional IOCs boot due to incomplete templates. Can we make sure we run the ioc tests (where they exist) for newly-created _02 iocs to make sure they actually work

[Tom-Willemsen]

Needs filling in. This means the ioc can't boot and the ioc tests for ioc _02 fail.

This is also true for all of the other IOCs in this PR.

[Tom-Willemsen]

I'm not sure this second IOC makes sense as it is an LvDCOM and only has one underlying vi?

[Tom-Willemsen]

Second IOC doesn't make sense for this device as it's an lvdcom of a single underlying vi

[Tom-Willemsen]

I'm not convinced this second IOC makes sense as no beamline at ISIS has multiple fermi choppers.

Additionally I think this has some C code/SNL in the ioc dir which would need moving to the support module to get a second IOC to work I think.

[Tom-Willemsen]

As above, no beamline at ISIS has multiple fermi choppers so I don't think this second IOC makes sense

[Tom-Willemsen]

Doesn't make sense to have multiple IOCs for this device, it's impossible to physically have more than one ORC on the beamline. Additionally there is only one of these devices in existence (on GEM)

[Tom-Willemsen]

Only one of this device physically exists - probably doesn't make sense to have multiple IOCs.