Using FrSky S6R with ersky9x
Re: Using FrSky S6R with ersky9x
Mike,
I'm confused with the polarity settings behavior. Previously (before the S6R-specific versions), I had External module configured to PPM / NEG and the trainer cable worked. The cable stopped working when I switched the polarity to POS. This was pretty much straight forward, at least I got used to it.
Then, with the S6R-compatible firmware, the cable didn't work regardless of the polarity set (either POS or NEG).
Now, with the latest build you posted, the "Trainer polarity" setting seem to have no effect on the simulator cable behavior at all as long as "External module" is enabled. If I set External module polarity to NEG, the cable works. If I set it to POS, it doesn't. So we're back to the initial behavior!!!
The only thing is that now there's this "Trainer polarity" line in the menu. It appears it starts to actually influence things as soon as External module is disabled. Then it seem to work fine (NEG = cable works, POS = cable doesn't work).
This is a bit confusing, although maybe it is intended to work that way...
I'm confused with the polarity settings behavior. Previously (before the S6R-specific versions), I had External module configured to PPM / NEG and the trainer cable worked. The cable stopped working when I switched the polarity to POS. This was pretty much straight forward, at least I got used to it.
Then, with the S6R-compatible firmware, the cable didn't work regardless of the polarity set (either POS or NEG).
Now, with the latest build you posted, the "Trainer polarity" setting seem to have no effect on the simulator cable behavior at all as long as "External module" is enabled. If I set External module polarity to NEG, the cable works. If I set it to POS, it doesn't. So we're back to the initial behavior!!!
The only thing is that now there's this "Trainer polarity" line in the menu. It appears it starts to actually influence things as soon as External module is disabled. Then it seem to work fine (NEG = cable works, POS = cable doesn't work).
This is a bit confusing, although maybe it is intended to work that way...
- MikeB
- 9x Developer
- Posts: 18000
- Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 1:24 pm
- Country: -
- Location: Poole, Dorset, UK
Re: Using FrSky S6R with ersky9x
Again, I can't reproduce that. Whatever I do to the external module setting, the trainer polarity setting still controls the trainer output.
This is with the power switch OFF, power switched by plugging in the trainer jack plug.
I can understand there may be a problem as the same PWM internal peripheral channel is used by both the PPM of the external module and the PPM of the trainer output.
It may be the problem occurs if you disable then enable the external module while operating in SIM trainer output mode.
I'm looking at the trainer output on a 'scope.
Mike.
This is with the power switch OFF, power switched by plugging in the trainer jack plug.
I can understand there may be a problem as the same PWM internal peripheral channel is used by both the PPM of the external module and the PPM of the trainer output.
It may be the problem occurs if you disable then enable the external module while operating in SIM trainer output mode.
I'm looking at the trainer output on a 'scope.
Mike.
erskyTx/er9x developer
The difficult we do immediately,
The impossible takes a little longer!
The difficult we do immediately,
The impossible takes a little longer!
Re: Using FrSky S6R with ersky9x
Hmm... May it be so that not all of the settings were applied when I first started the radio updated with the latest firmware? Maybe the data model was not updated until I actually updated the 'Trainer polarity' manually the first time?
Because right now everything works just as you explained. But I swear I had 'External module polarity' setting controlling my trainer cable behavior when I wrote my previous post...
Because right now everything works just as you explained. But I swear I had 'External module polarity' setting controlling my trainer cable behavior when I wrote my previous post...
- MikeB
- 9x Developer
- Posts: 18000
- Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 1:24 pm
- Country: -
- Location: Poole, Dorset, UK
Re: Using FrSky S6R with ersky9x
I've updated the test version on the first post to include the 9XR-PRO as well.
Mike.
Mike.
erskyTx/er9x developer
The difficult we do immediately,
The impossible takes a little longer!
The difficult we do immediately,
The impossible takes a little longer!
Re: Using FrSky S6R with ersky9x
Thanks, Mike - have downloaded it but short of time right now so I'll try it later our time or tomorrow morning our time and report back.
Regards,
ozphoenix
Regards,
ozphoenix
Re: Using FrSky S6R with ersky9x
Mike - As always, thank you for your support -- I can confirm that this new version:
03-Nov-2016 23:33
Fixes for SIM and text editing
SKY/AR9X and 9XR-PRO
works as expected with the Phoenix sim with the Tx unit initially powered off (it comes on when you insert the sim cable to the training port) and without the need for special settings in a 'trainer' profile -- that is, basically as in r218 before the s6r changes -- and the option to now set trainer POS or NEG is helpful - thanks.
I also confirmed that the s6r behaves as previously (notwithstanding any of the possible problems reported by all of us) and that I also found the 'Inverted' message on the calibration process (thanks)!
BTW - an observation and a curiosity question of a not-so-important nature - it seems that if you interrupt the calibration process by putting the s6r in the totally wrong position (that is, not the one requested at any given stage) and doing a MENU LONG, the s6r goes into a 'lock-up state' with the yellow/orange led on and cannot be removed from this condition by any step on the Tx, including a Ch12 self-test -- the only way to recover is a power-cycle of the s6r -- at least, this is as it seems to me - can you replicate this and is there a way to overcome this type of mistake (other than not doing it in the first place)?
03-Nov-2016 23:33
Fixes for SIM and text editing
SKY/AR9X and 9XR-PRO
works as expected with the Phoenix sim with the Tx unit initially powered off (it comes on when you insert the sim cable to the training port) and without the need for special settings in a 'trainer' profile -- that is, basically as in r218 before the s6r changes -- and the option to now set trainer POS or NEG is helpful - thanks.
I also confirmed that the s6r behaves as previously (notwithstanding any of the possible problems reported by all of us) and that I also found the 'Inverted' message on the calibration process (thanks)!
BTW - an observation and a curiosity question of a not-so-important nature - it seems that if you interrupt the calibration process by putting the s6r in the totally wrong position (that is, not the one requested at any given stage) and doing a MENU LONG, the s6r goes into a 'lock-up state' with the yellow/orange led on and cannot be removed from this condition by any step on the Tx, including a Ch12 self-test -- the only way to recover is a power-cycle of the s6r -- at least, this is as it seems to me - can you replicate this and is there a way to overcome this type of mistake (other than not doing it in the first place)?
Re: Using FrSky S6R with ersky9x
Mike,
I haven't had time to check the S6R on a plane (and the weather isn't good anyway), but there are a couple of other colleagues who already tested the configuration and calibration routine on their models. They confirmed it works great! Thank you VERY MUCH!!!
I haven't had time to check the S6R on a plane (and the weather isn't good anyway), but there are a couple of other colleagues who already tested the configuration and calibration routine on their models. They confirmed it works great! Thank you VERY MUCH!!!
Re: Using FrSky S6R with ersky9x
Mike B - did you have a chance to try to replicate this and find an explanation? I think the answer is: 'yeah...and so..??' but I was just curious if there was a simple change to give an 'out' instead of power-cycling it.
Regards, ozphoenix
Regards, ozphoenix
ozphoenix wrote:Mike - As always, thank you for your support -- I can confirm that this new version:
BTW - an observation and a curiosity question of a not-so-important nature - it seems that if you interrupt the calibration process by putting the s6r in the totally wrong position (that is, not the one requested at any given stage) and doing a MENU LONG, the s6r goes into a 'lock-up state' with the yellow/orange led on and cannot be removed from this condition by any step on the Tx, including a Ch12 self-test -- the only way to recover is a power-cycle of the s6r -- at least, this is as it seems to me - can you replicate this and is there a way to overcome this type of mistake (other than not doing it in the first place)?
- MikeB
- 9x Developer
- Posts: 18000
- Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 1:24 pm
- Country: -
- Location: Poole, Dorset, UK
Re: Using FrSky S6R with ersky9x
I just tried this. I did get it into the state with the yellow LED on solid, but if I put the Rx into the position it was looking for, and waited long enough (5 to 10 seconds), eventually the yellow LED flashed. So, it seems you can complete the calibration process, but I would prefer to complete it 'normally'.
Mike.
Mike.
erskyTx/er9x developer
The difficult we do immediately,
The impossible takes a little longer!
The difficult we do immediately,
The impossible takes a little longer!
Re: Using FrSky S6R with ersky9x
Ah, ok - so, patience is a virtue after all ) I agree -- 'normal' completion is better than 'interference'. Thanks for checking and responding - I'll be more patient in future.
- MikeB
- 9x Developer
- Posts: 18000
- Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 1:24 pm
- Country: -
- Location: Poole, Dorset, UK
Re: Using FrSky S6R with ersky9x
General information:
It is possible that early Taranis transmitters don't work with the S6R. I have a report that someone with an early Taranis can bind, but no servos operate. I can confirm this using my prototype Taranis, and also an early production Taranis.
Looking inside, the XJT module of the first two is labelled "D16HV2", I haven't opened up my production Taranis to check.
My prototype Plus works fine. The XJT in that is labelled "D16HV3".
Mike.
It is possible that early Taranis transmitters don't work with the S6R. I have a report that someone with an early Taranis can bind, but no servos operate. I can confirm this using my prototype Taranis, and also an early production Taranis.
Looking inside, the XJT module of the first two is labelled "D16HV2", I haven't opened up my production Taranis to check.
My prototype Plus works fine. The XJT in that is labelled "D16HV3".
Mike.
erskyTx/er9x developer
The difficult we do immediately,
The impossible takes a little longer!
The difficult we do immediately,
The impossible takes a little longer!
Re: Using FrSky S6R with ersky9x
Mike,MikeB wrote:Just to improve user friendliness. New users won't know that PXX is needed for a XJT!
Mike.
In eepesky, the drop down box on the model file for the protocol tab still shows PXX instead of XJT - is that worth adding to the list of 'next time I'm in it' for changing also?
Regards,
ozphoenix
- MikeB
- 9x Developer
- Posts: 18000
- Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 1:24 pm
- Country: -
- Location: Poole, Dorset, UK
Re: Using FrSky S6R with ersky9x
Thanks, the source code has already been changed to XJT.
I posted a test version of eepskye here: viewtopic.php?f=7&t=4676#p65894, on 10-Nov-2016 that should have this change in.
Mike.
I posted a test version of eepskye here: viewtopic.php?f=7&t=4676#p65894, on 10-Nov-2016 that should have this change in.
Mike.
erskyTx/er9x developer
The difficult we do immediately,
The impossible takes a little longer!
The difficult we do immediately,
The impossible takes a little longer!
Re: Using FrSky S6R with ersky9x
Ok, thanks - got it now and am using it - with XJT in place
Re: Using FrSky S6R with ersky9x
Mike,
What are your thoughts about releasing a new version with the latest changes included? The last official release of ersky9x was back in January (a loooong time ago!). There were a lot of great changes since then, and I believe many of them are ready to be included in the next official release...
What are your thoughts about releasing a new version with the latest changes included? The last official release of ersky9x was back in January (a loooong time ago!). There were a lot of great changes since then, and I believe many of them are ready to be included in the next official release...
Re: Using FrSky S6R with ersky9x
Yeah, there are a few features that would be nice on the next release, like the trainer over sbus for example
João
João
My er9x/Ersky9x/eepskye Video Tutorials
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL5uJhoD7sAKidZmkhMpYpp_qcuIqJXhb9
Donate to Er9x/Ersky9x:
https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=YHX43JR3J7XGW
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL5uJhoD7sAKidZmkhMpYpp_qcuIqJXhb9
Donate to Er9x/Ersky9x:
https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=YHX43JR3J7XGW
- MikeB
- 9x Developer
- Posts: 18000
- Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 1:24 pm
- Country: -
- Location: Poole, Dorset, UK
Re: Using FrSky S6R with ersky9x
I'm trying to get a release done. Typically, what happens is I think I'm ready for a release, then something 'needs' to be added, so I start adding that, and so it goes on.
I have to stop to get a release done, which is why if I do a release about now, I won't be able to fully integrate the trainer over SBUS. If I start on that before a release, I'm sure something else will come up (like AFHDS2A telemetry over MULTI just has) that will then delay a release again!
I have just done a Github commit and merge of the next branch into the master branch, so should be ready for a release.
Mike.
I have to stop to get a release done, which is why if I do a release about now, I won't be able to fully integrate the trainer over SBUS. If I start on that before a release, I'm sure something else will come up (like AFHDS2A telemetry over MULTI just has) that will then delay a release again!
I have just done a Github commit and merge of the next branch into the master branch, so should be ready for a release.
Mike.
erskyTx/er9x developer
The difficult we do immediately,
The impossible takes a little longer!
The difficult we do immediately,
The impossible takes a little longer!
Re: Using FrSky S6R with ersky9x
Mike, what about making the test versions available on er9x.com as well?
Thanks
João
Thanks
João
My er9x/Ersky9x/eepskye Video Tutorials
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL5uJhoD7sAKidZmkhMpYpp_qcuIqJXhb9
Donate to Er9x/Ersky9x:
https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=YHX43JR3J7XGW
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL5uJhoD7sAKidZmkhMpYpp_qcuIqJXhb9
Donate to Er9x/Ersky9x:
https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=YHX43JR3J7XGW
Re: Using FrSky S6R with ersky9x
I don't think test versions should be published on er9x.com. It's going to be too messy. Even now er9x.com is perceived as "complicated" by some.
I would suggest to try and make the releases more frequent. For example, a feature is added and published in the 'testing' thread. If there are no critical errors reported within a week (2 weeks maximum!), then a new version is released to public with that feature in it. One may say this increases a risk that something might be broken. But on the other hand, there will be a much wider audience testing this new firmware. So issues will be detected (and reported) faster. And this should speed up the development process in general.
I would suggest to try and make the releases more frequent. For example, a feature is added and published in the 'testing' thread. If there are no critical errors reported within a week (2 weeks maximum!), then a new version is released to public with that feature in it. One may say this increases a risk that something might be broken. But on the other hand, there will be a much wider audience testing this new firmware. So issues will be detected (and reported) faster. And this should speed up the development process in general.
Re: Using FrSky S6R with ersky9x
You definitely got a point there But I do believe if the test files were also available, and well identified as TEST, the same wider audience would give the new features a try BEFORE they get released. I think there are more chances people see the test files if they are also in there..
Test and release words look very different, even to me..
By the way, Anyone in here that could give er9x.com a face lift? That is, if Mike would agree with it, of course..
I wouldn't know how to do it.
João
Test and release words look very different, even to me..
By the way, Anyone in here that could give er9x.com a face lift? That is, if Mike would agree with it, of course..
I wouldn't know how to do it.
João
My er9x/Ersky9x/eepskye Video Tutorials
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL5uJhoD7sAKidZmkhMpYpp_qcuIqJXhb9
Donate to Er9x/Ersky9x:
https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=YHX43JR3J7XGW
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL5uJhoD7sAKidZmkhMpYpp_qcuIqJXhb9
Donate to Er9x/Ersky9x:
https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=YHX43JR3J7XGW
Re: Using FrSky S6R with ersky9x
Well, it's an extra work for Mike to publish each test version (AND the description) on er9x.com. It's also an extra complexity for someone new who comes to er9x.com looking for a firmware for his radio.
The way I see it is that those of us looking for the 'bleeding edge' of technology will anyway get to this forum and find the test version they need (and also read related conversations, limitations and precautions, if any). Others will just get the latest 'stable' version from er9x.com. I think this is perfectly fine.
It's just that the "stable" is, perhaps, a bit too stable the way things are now. Here's a real life example:
Back in April, there was a "Pot no.3 bug" reported. Mike did a brilliant job to locate and correct the issue. A test version with the fix was available in just a few days after the bug was reported! And it was confirmed the fix works as expected. But I think that fix STILL didn't make it into an official release (although even Mike noted this bug should be considered critical)! And that situation is veeery wrong, in my opinion...
The way I see it is that those of us looking for the 'bleeding edge' of technology will anyway get to this forum and find the test version they need (and also read related conversations, limitations and precautions, if any). Others will just get the latest 'stable' version from er9x.com. I think this is perfectly fine.
It's just that the "stable" is, perhaps, a bit too stable the way things are now. Here's a real life example:
Back in April, there was a "Pot no.3 bug" reported. Mike did a brilliant job to locate and correct the issue. A test version with the fix was available in just a few days after the bug was reported! And it was confirmed the fix works as expected. But I think that fix STILL didn't make it into an official release (although even Mike noted this bug should be considered critical)! And that situation is veeery wrong, in my opinion...
Re: Using FrSky S6R with ersky9x
I agree with you on everything else but I still have a different opinion about posting the test versions in the er9x page.
More people would test the firmware being aware that is a test version, as long as it was well identified as test version.
You said before and I quote:
So, no doubt that by having the test versions on the er9x page there would be more chances of them being tested by more people. There is an alternative to posting the test files directly at the er9x page though, and it wouldn't mean more work for Mike. There is a section called "Useful Links". A link to the Test Versions thread could be posted there, so people could find them easily..
I have just checked the amount of downloads of the latest Ersky9x test file, 473 to be precise, and one thing I am amazed with (I shouldn't be surprised really ), is the so little amount of bug reports. This could quite safely qualify this test version as a serious candidate to a release, and it also shows that ErSky9x test versions are safe.
I actually only use test versions and except very rare and special controlled situations, never had a situation where my model was in danger.
João
More people would test the firmware being aware that is a test version, as long as it was well identified as test version.
You said before and I quote:
I think this is exactly what Mike has been trying to avoid. If that is the case, as it seems to be, I fully agree....then a new version is released to public with that feature in it. One may say this increases a risk that something might be broken.
So, no doubt that by having the test versions on the er9x page there would be more chances of them being tested by more people. There is an alternative to posting the test files directly at the er9x page though, and it wouldn't mean more work for Mike. There is a section called "Useful Links". A link to the Test Versions thread could be posted there, so people could find them easily..
I have just checked the amount of downloads of the latest Ersky9x test file, 473 to be precise, and one thing I am amazed with (I shouldn't be surprised really ), is the so little amount of bug reports. This could quite safely qualify this test version as a serious candidate to a release, and it also shows that ErSky9x test versions are safe.
I actually only use test versions and except very rare and special controlled situations, never had a situation where my model was in danger.
João
My er9x/Ersky9x/eepskye Video Tutorials
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL5uJhoD7sAKidZmkhMpYpp_qcuIqJXhb9
Donate to Er9x/Ersky9x:
https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=YHX43JR3J7XGW
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL5uJhoD7sAKidZmkhMpYpp_qcuIqJXhb9
Donate to Er9x/Ersky9x:
https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=YHX43JR3J7XGW
Re: Using FrSky S6R with ersky9x
Sure! That's what forums are for, right?but I still have a different opinion about posting the test versions in the er9x page.
This is a good idea! Adding a static link to the test versions threads does not require regular efforts to keep it up to date with every new compilation. And it will allow people to find relevant test threads.There is an alternative to posting the test files directly at the er9x page though, and it wouldn't mean more work for Mike. There is a section called "Useful Links". A link to the Test Versions thread could be posted there, so people could find them easily..
This is exactly my point! If it's there in the test versions thread, and there are no critical issues reported for a week or two - let's push it to "stable"! Isn't it better to release that version to everybody, rather than only to those looking at 'test versions' threads?I have just checked the amount of downloads of the latest Ersky9x test file, 473 to be precise, and one thing I am amazed with (I shouldn't be surprised really ), is the so little amount of bug reports. This could quite safely qualify this test version as a serious candidate to a release, and it also shows that ErSky9x test versions are safe.
Bugs? Yes, any software may have bugs, despite all the testing efforts. So even if we test it for a year, it may still have bugs in it. If we are concerned about bugs, the 1-2 weeks "grace period" should filter most of the obvious / critical issues. And other issues will be identified (and could be fixed) much quicker if the software will be used by everybody.
I also use test versions. And anyone who wants a change made sometime this year also HAS to use a test version. This is exactly the downside of the slow release cycle.I actually only use test versions
Ok, you're an exception - you'll always use the latest test versions, maybe even those not yet posted on the Net!
- MikeB
- 9x Developer
- Posts: 18000
- Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 1:24 pm
- Country: -
- Location: Poole, Dorset, UK
Re: Using FrSky S6R with ersky9x
I'm working on a release for now!
Meanwhile, back on the S6R, I've added a copy of my "SportSet" program to the first post, together with instructions for use. This now also handles the STK connected to the S6R, and allows you to set a servo direction to "Off". It is still in development, but may be useful if you use er9x, or use a Taranis with openTx and don't want to upgrade the firmware to be able to run the LUA script.
Mike.
Meanwhile, back on the S6R, I've added a copy of my "SportSet" program to the first post, together with instructions for use. This now also handles the STK connected to the S6R, and allows you to set a servo direction to "Off". It is still in development, but may be useful if you use er9x, or use a Taranis with openTx and don't want to upgrade the firmware to be able to run the LUA script.
Mike.
erskyTx/er9x developer
The difficult we do immediately,
The impossible takes a little longer!
The difficult we do immediately,
The impossible takes a little longer!
Re: Using FrSky S6R with ersky9x
I often would like to use the latest code but I also like my private modifications. So I need to use the source files and compile according to my modifications.I also use test versions. And anyone who wants a change made sometime this year also HAS to use a test version. This is exactly the downside of the slow release cycle.
With "only " the compiled code available, I'm out of the game most of the time.
I would be happy with releases in a one or two month cycle.
(As I'm not a C++ programmer, it's always a hard job to get my modifications into the new code ;( )
Reinhard
Re: RE: Re: Using FrSky S6R with ersky9x
Ok, we now agree on everything isn't that great?
This is the exception I have mentioned before where one could not fly with that specific version .
In my case, the very few times it happened, the cause of the problem was faulty hardware most of the times.
João
Sometimes when there is something very specific, for example some possible bad bug, Mike might send some very specific firmware.andrewju wrote: Ok, you're an exception - you'll always use the latest test versions, maybe even those not yet posted on the Net!
This is the exception I have mentioned before where one could not fly with that specific version .
In my case, the very few times it happened, the cause of the problem was faulty hardware most of the times.
João
My er9x/Ersky9x/eepskye Video Tutorials
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL5uJhoD7sAKidZmkhMpYpp_qcuIqJXhb9
Donate to Er9x/Ersky9x:
https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=YHX43JR3J7XGW
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL5uJhoD7sAKidZmkhMpYpp_qcuIqJXhb9
Donate to Er9x/Ersky9x:
https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=YHX43JR3J7XGW
Re: Using FrSky S6R with ersky9x
Mike,MikeB wrote:I've added a copy of my "SportSet" program to the first post, together with instructions for use.
Is there a way, by chance, to use SportSet without an STK ?
I don't think the release cycle will affect source code availability in any way.ReSt wrote:I need to use the source files and compile according to my modifications.
With "only " the compiled code available, I'm out of the game most of the time.
Well, unless Mike wants to change something in this regard.
Well, this is also an option! Though, I think after all it will be related to new features / bug fixes available, and not to a specific time frame.ReSt wrote:I would be happy with releases in a one or two month cycle.
Anyway, it's up to Mike to decide. Something tells me he knows how to do it best!
Yuppie!!!jhsa wrote:Ok, we now agree on everything isn't that great?
This is very well understood, João!jhsa wrote:Sometimes when there is something very specific, for example some possible bad bug, Mike might send some very specific firmware.
This is the exception I have mentioned before where one could not fly with that specific version .
In my case, the very few times it happened, the cause of the problem was faulty hardware most of the times.
Re: Using FrSky S6R with ersky9x
Don't take that timeframe to important. I meant "not more often than.. "andrewju wrote:Well, this is also an option! Though, I think after all it will be related to new features / bug fixes available, and not to a specific time frame.ReSt wrote:I would be happy with releases in a one or two month cycle.
So it's probably my fault when I'm having problems with the downloads. I'm used to make a "git clone" without any further selections on the clone window . Trying the selection "Branch = next" or "branch=master" did not get me really happy. Sometimes I get the old unchanged stuff and sometimes I get new stuff, that doesn't compile. So I assume, that the source code on github is not always in a consistent state.
Anyone who can enlighten me how to get a cloned download that contains the "latest" fixes and nothing, that has been begun and not yet finished and therefor doesn't compile ??
Reinhard
Re: Using FrSky S6R with ersky9x
Uhh... My experience with git is limited to step-by-step guides available on the Net. I'm far from being an expert there, unfortunately...
- MikeB
- 9x Developer
- Posts: 18000
- Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 1:24 pm
- Country: -
- Location: Poole, Dorset, UK
Re: Using FrSky S6R with ersky9x
I don't think so. The receiver polls for SPort packets and the STK is needed to handle the timing of the response.andrewju wrote: Mike,
Is there a way, by chance, to use SportSet without an STK ?
Mike.
erskyTx/er9x developer
The difficult we do immediately,
The impossible takes a little longer!
The difficult we do immediately,
The impossible takes a little longer!