Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [linuxham] to hamlib or not to hamlib (was: Fldigi and K3)

Expand Messages
  • Ed
    ... With hamlib and my FT-450 I can only access frequency and rig mode. With rigCAT I can also select filter bandwidth. With flrig I also can select settings
    Message 1 of 3 , Feb 5 3:55 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      Pierfrancesco Caci wrote:
      > On Fri, Feb 5, 2010 at 00:39, Ed <autek@...> wrote:
      >> Personally, hamlib would be my last choice for rig control.
      >>
      >
      > Ed,
      > can you elaborate on that please?
      > I find that using hamlib with its rpc.rigd gives more flexibility,
      > allowing simultaneous use of different programs that access the radio,
      > versus a single program accessing it directly.
      >
      > Pf
      >

      With hamlib and my FT-450 I can only access frequency and rig mode. With
      rigCAT I can also select filter bandwidth. With flrig I also can select
      settings for 10 other rig functions.

      I think a persons choice for rig control would depend on their operating
      demands.


      Ed W3NR
    • Rick Kunath
      ... As for me, I ve used HamLib successfully over the years with a variety of radios. Also some receivers too. One thing I found out early on was that because
      Message 2 of 3 , Feb 5 5:08 AM
      • 0 Attachment
        Ed wrote:
        > With hamlib and my FT-450 I can only access frequency and rig mode. With
        > rigCAT I can also select filter bandwidth. With flrig I also can select
        > settings for 10 other rig functions.
        >
        > I think a persons choice for rig control would depend on their operating
        > demands.
        >
        >
        > Ed W3NR

        As for me, I've used HamLib successfully over the years with a variety
        of radios. Also some receivers too.

        One thing I found out early on was that because the development work on
        the individual radio modules is all done by volunteers, mostly the
        person writing the module doesn't have access to the radio itself to
        test all of the functions. So they rely on us to do some testing and
        report back anything that does not work well. I have had lots of luck
        working with some of the developers over the years getting features fine
        tuned or added for various radios I owned at one time or another.

        I generally used CuteCom under Linux to do the testing and debugging of
        the actual CAT commands. This is a GUI based application and works so
        easily for this. Once the developer knows what needs to be seen by the
        radio, it's easy to add it.

        Even just sending along S-meter calibration data to the maintainer for
        your radio helps. I have access to a bunch of communications service
        monitors here so I can generate calibrated signal strengths. And getting
        the table for the S-meter right is something anyone who has access to a
        generator can forward to the maintainer for your radio's module.

        It's always amazing to me how well HamLib works when some of the
        programming is done straight from the manual with the maintainer not
        necessarily having your exact radio in front of them.

        If we lend a little hand, we can make HamLib even better.

        I know I'll do what I can. And thanks and kudos to the HamLib devel team.

        Rick Kunath, k9ao
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.