Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
Skip to search.
 

Unable to disable digi a T2-135 remotely

Expand Messages
  • P. Suryono Adisoemarta
    Scott, I have a T2-135 board acting as a WXdigi (Firmware revision 54479). For testing another radio with OT2m, I was disabling the digi function of this
    Message 1 of 8 , Jun 2, 2008
      Scott,

      I have a T2-135 board acting as a WXdigi (Firmware
      revision 54479). For testing another radio with OT2m,
      I was disabling the digi function of this T2-135
      remotely, by using "cmd digiid N off" , where N=1 up
      to 8, and made all 8 aliases off.

      Now what had happened the unit ends up still digi-ing,
      but with no callsign substition.

      Here is ths test sequence:

      First is with WIDE alias (on #2) digi enabled:
      YD0NXX | cmd digiid
      TKUSIR | DIGIID 1:OFF 2:ON 3:OFF 4:OFF 5:OFF 6:OFF
      7:OFF 8:OFF

      The resultant digi-ed packet:
      YC2EUZ-1>APOT2A,TKUSIR*,WIDE2* <UI Len=74>: bla bla
      bla


      Next, with all aliases disabled:
      TKUSIR | DIGIID 1:OFF 2:OFF 3:OFF 4:OFF 5:OFF 6:OFF
      7:OFF 8:OFF

      The resultant digi-ed packet:
      YC2EUZ-1>APOT2A,WIDE2* <UI Len=74>: bla bla bla

      So the T2-135 is still digi-ing, but with callsign
      substitution disabled.

      Have you seen this behavior?


      73 de Paulus - N5SNN / YD0NXX
    • Scott Miller
      Yes, you want to use the USEALIAS command to turn off specific aliases. DIGIID just turns off the callsign substitution. Now, with the script engine, you could
      Message 2 of 8 , Jun 2, 2008
        Yes, you want to use the USEALIAS command to turn off specific aliases.
        DIGIID just turns off the callsign substitution.

        Now, with the script engine, you could write a macro to switch them all
        off and on... or switch between a number of different configurations...

        Scott

        P. Suryono Adisoemarta wrote:
        >
        >
        >
        > Scott,
        >
        > I have a T2-135 board acting as a WXdigi (Firmware
        > revision 54479). For testing another radio with OT2m,
        > I was disabling the digi function of this T2-135
        > remotely, by using "cmd digiid N off" , where N=1 up
        > to 8, and made all 8 aliases off.
        >
        > Now what had happened the unit ends up still digi-ing,
        > but with no callsign substition.
        >
        > Here is ths test sequence:
        >
        > First is with WIDE alias (on #2) digi enabled:
        > YD0NXX | cmd digiid
        > TKUSIR | DIGIID 1:OFF 2:ON 3:OFF 4:OFF 5:OFF 6:OFF
        > 7:OFF 8:OFF
        >
        > The resultant digi-ed packet:
        > YC2EUZ-1>APOT2A,TKUSIR*,WIDE2* <UI Len=74>: bla bla
        > bla
        >
        > Next, with all aliases disabled:
        > TKUSIR | DIGIID 1:OFF 2:OFF 3:OFF 4:OFF 5:OFF 6:OFF
        > 7:OFF 8:OFF
        >
        > The resultant digi-ed packet:
        > YC2EUZ-1>APOT2A,WIDE2* <UI Len=74>: bla bla bla
        >
        > So the T2-135 is still digi-ing, but with callsign
        > substitution disabled.
        >
        > Have you seen this behavior?
        >
        > 73 de Paulus - N5SNN / YD0NXX
        >
        >
      • Tom Twist
        Scott I m very excited about the scripting engine, and wanted to try the new beta. I get error message when trying to load from web: Unable to verify block at
        Message 3 of 8 , Jun 2, 2008
          Scott

          I'm very excited about the scripting engine, and wanted to
          try the new beta.

          I get error message when trying to load from web:
          "Unable to verify block at 0x140c"
          "Configuration file write failed"

          The block address changes from one try to another.

          I've also tried to reset/use defaults.
          Firmware Build says 54479

          The code list contains:
          On Startup
          PrintA "HI\r\n"
          End Block
          Increment Counter 2
          If Peek 3 and 16 = 16
          Poke 2, 254
          End Block
          Clear Flags 10000000
          Else
          If Flags 0xxxxxxx
          Poke 2, 254


          I just downloaded otwincfg.

          Please advice.

          Tom

          --
          Email: tom@... (ttwist@..., lb8x@...)
          Phone: +47 21688655/90662366, Ham call sign: LB8X
          Snail: Tom Twist, Kirkeveien 8A, N3970 Langesund, Norway
        • Scott Miller
          Did you load the latest beta firmware? The old version did have a sample program in it, which you see there. That still shouldn t cause the problem you re
          Message 4 of 8 , Jun 2, 2008
            Did you load the latest beta firmware? The old version did have a
            sample program in it, which you see there. That still shouldn't cause
            the problem you're seeing.

            Scott

            Tom Twist wrote:
            > Scott
            >
            > I'm very excited about the scripting engine, and wanted to
            > try the new beta.
            >
            > I get error message when trying to load from web:
            > "Unable to verify block at 0x140c"
            > "Configuration file write failed"
            >
            > The block address changes from one try to another.
            >
            > I've also tried to reset/use defaults.
            > Firmware Build says 54479
            >
            > The code list contains:
            > On Startup
            > PrintA "HI\r\n"
            > End Block
            > Increment Counter 2
            > If Peek 3 and 16 = 16
            > Poke 2, 254
            > End Block
            > Clear Flags 10000000
            > Else
            > If Flags 0xxxxxxx
            > Poke 2, 254
            >
            >
            > I just downloaded otwincfg.
            >
            > Please advice.
            >
            > Tom
            >
          • Tom Twist
            On Mon, 02 Jun 2008 20:09:53 +0200, Scott Miller ... Scott I don t know what version I had before trying to update, and I don t know the
            Message 5 of 8 , Jun 2, 2008
              On Mon, 02 Jun 2008 20:09:53 +0200, Scott Miller <scott@...>
              wrote:

              > Did you load the latest beta firmware? The old version did have a
              > sample program in it, which you see there. That still shouldn't cause
              > the problem you're seeing.
              >

              Scott

              I don't know what version I had before trying to update,
              and I don't know the build number of the latest beta.

              otwincfg says Firmware Build 54479

              Is this the current 01-14-2008 firmwarw, or the new beta?

              Tom

              --
              Email: tom@... (ttwist@..., lb8x@...)
              Phone: +47 21688655/90662366, Ham call sign: LB8X
              Snail: Tom Twist, Kirkeveien 8A, N3970 Langesund, Norway
            • Scott Miller
              That sounds like the existing current version. I ll have to make sure I didn t put the wrong file up there. The build numbers are actually the modified Julian
              Message 6 of 8 , Jun 2, 2008
                That sounds like the existing current version. I'll have to make sure I
                didn't put the wrong file up there.

                The build numbers are actually the modified Julian day of the build.

                Scott

                Tom Twist wrote:
                > On Mon, 02 Jun 2008 20:09:53 +0200, Scott Miller <scott@...>
                > wrote:
                >
                >> Did you load the latest beta firmware? The old version did have a
                >> sample program in it, which you see there. That still shouldn't cause
                >> the problem you're seeing.
                >>
                >
                > Scott
                >
                > I don't know what version I had before trying to update,
                > and I don't know the build number of the latest beta.
                >
                > otwincfg says Firmware Build 54479
                >
                > Is this the current 01-14-2008 firmwarw, or the new beta?
                >
                > Tom
                >
              • Tom Twist
                On Mon, 02 Jun 2008 20:48:03 +0200, Scott Miller ... Scott I eventually managed to install the 54618, as you could probably tell from the
                Message 7 of 8 , Jun 3, 2008
                  On Mon, 02 Jun 2008 20:48:03 +0200, Scott Miller <scott@...>
                  wrote:

                  > That sounds like the existing current version. I'll have to make sure I
                  > didn't put the wrong file up there.
                  >
                  > The build numbers are actually the modified Julian day of the build.
                  >

                  Scott

                  I eventually managed to install the 54618, as you could probably tell
                  from the "Scripting problem" thread.

                  When you wrote that you had fixed the port B problem, I again tried
                  to load the beta, and had the same problems as before, it stopped loading
                  at random addresses. I tried to revert to 54479, but had the same problems.
                  I tried both of these at least 10 times.
                  And, when I quit from otwincfg, T2 started to act strangely.
                  ACT LED went red, then just glowing, and both TX and RX was lit very
                  bright.
                  I could see the current meter on my 30 A PSU move.

                  I managed to load 54479 on another computer, with the previous version of
                  otwincfg.

                  Could this be a problem in otwincfg?

                  Now I won't update the firmware until this is resolved, as my T2 acts as a
                  local fill-in digi.

                  Is it possible to damage the processor by this error? Im not so familiar
                  with
                  Motorola/Freescale processors anymore. I work mostly with AVR. But my
                  first micro
                  was the MC6800, back in 1976. And I continued with 6802 and 6809.

                  Tom

                  --
                  Email: tom@... (ttwist@..., lb8x@...)
                  Phone: +47 21688655/90662366, Ham call sign: LB8X
                  Snail: Tom Twist, Kirkeveien 8A, N3970 Langesund, Norway
                • Scott Miller
                  Tom, looks like there was a stack size problem causing interference between packet decoding and the script engine. I ll post an update soon. Scott
                  Message 8 of 8 , Jun 5, 2008
                    Tom, looks like there was a stack size problem causing interference
                    between packet decoding and the script engine. I'll post an update soon.

                    Scott

                    Tom Twist wrote:
                    > On Mon, 02 Jun 2008 20:48:03 +0200, Scott Miller <scott@...>
                    > wrote:
                    >
                    >> That sounds like the existing current version. I'll have to make sure I
                    >> didn't put the wrong file up there.
                    >>
                    >> The build numbers are actually the modified Julian day of the build.
                    >>
                    >
                    > Scott
                    >
                    > I eventually managed to install the 54618, as you could probably tell
                    > from the "Scripting problem" thread.
                    >
                    > When you wrote that you had fixed the port B problem, I again tried
                    > to load the beta, and had the same problems as before, it stopped loading
                    > at random addresses. I tried to revert to 54479, but had the same problems.
                    > I tried both of these at least 10 times.
                    > And, when I quit from otwincfg, T2 started to act strangely.
                    > ACT LED went red, then just glowing, and both TX and RX was lit very
                    > bright.
                    > I could see the current meter on my 30 A PSU move.
                    >
                    > I managed to load 54479 on another computer, with the previous version of
                    > otwincfg.
                    >
                    > Could this be a problem in otwincfg?
                    >
                    > Now I won't update the firmware until this is resolved, as my T2 acts as a
                    > local fill-in digi.
                    >
                    > Is it possible to damage the processor by this error? Im not so familiar
                    > with
                    > Motorola/Freescale processors anymore. I work mostly with AVR. But my
                    > first micro
                    > was the MC6800, back in 1976. And I continued with 6802 and 6809.
                    >
                    > Tom
                    >
                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.