|
Locked
Re: Separate Copy of WSJT-X on another computer not Shading Wrk B4
Hasan Schiers N0AN
...and New Call on Band works just fine, thanks tip! Hasan On Thu, Jun 25, 2020 at 12:58 PM Bill Somerville <g4wjs@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
Locked
Re: Separate Copy of WSJT-X on another computer not Shading Wrk B4
Hasan Schiers N0AN
thanks Bill and Al, and I can't run JTA and DXMaps on the same computer (they both want udp 2237, so I'll just have to live with it. The primary computer is running JTA and it is doing the shading as Al suggested. 73 N0AN Hasan On Thu, Jun 25, 2020 at 12:58 PM Bill Somerville <g4wjs@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
Locked
Re: WSJT to N1MM Logging.
Hi Rick,
I'm not sure we have done anything
wrong here. The change that has caused you issues was introduced
in WSJT-X v2.1.0 GA which was released July 15, 2019 with the
following release notice:
Release: WSJT-X 2.1 July 15, 2019 ------------------- WSJT-X 2.1 is a major update that introduces FT4, a new protocol targeted at HF contesting. Other improvements have been made in the following areas: - FT8 waveform generated with GMSK, fully backward compatible - user options for waterfall and spectrum display - *contest logging* - rig control - user interface - UDP messaging for inter-program communication - accessibility There are numerous minor enhancements and bug fixes. We now provide a separate installation package for 64-bit Windows 7 and later, with significant improvements in decoding speed. My emphasis on "contest logging". The
accompanying change log included this entry:
commit 91aa591a7139d0bb3c3f989fd613941ee4790cdd Author: Bill Somerville <bill@...> Date: Mon Jun 24 00:56:41 2019 +0100 Better ADIF conformance for ARRL Field Day mode This change may break N1MM Logger+ integration, notably the CLASS ADIF field is populated which may not be recognized by N1MM Logger+, nor interfaces to it. One exception to ADIF conformance is that the ARRL_SECT field may be populated with the value DX despite it not being a valid ARRL_SECT enumeration value. This is done for consistency with N1MM Logger+ ADIF exports. Details from here:
73
Bill G4WJS. On 25/06/2020 13:27, Rick Ellison
wrote:
Hi Bill.. After looking at things last night and calming down some it ended up being just one field change. Last year the Qso's Class was being sent out via the RST_RCVD field. This year it has been moved to the CLASS field. This is what was not noticed. In our transfer routines we do n not have the CLASS field in the import. That was added and a couple other changes needed to be made to let that be captured. 73 Rick N2AMG P.S. A new version should be posted in a few minutes.. -----Original Message----- From: main@WSJTX.groups.io [mailto:main@WSJTX.groups.io] On Behalf Of Bill Somerville Sent: Thursday, June 25, 2020 7:00 AM To: main@WSJTX.groups.io Subject: Re: [WSJTX] WSJT to N1MM Logging. On 25/06/2020 01:21, Rick Ellison wrote:Sometime tomorrow there will be either a new full build or an Experimental version of N1MM built for interaction with WSJT for theupcoming Field Day.It was brought to the developers attention tonight that the Exchanges that WSJT-X used last year for logging the FD exchange information were not the same this year. So the class and section were not being logged correctly. I went back thru all of the revision notes for WSJT-X and I find this mentioned no place in those notes. This is not something that should have been missed a couple of days before the contest. Unless the N1MM team is notified of changes that need to be made there would have been a lot of un happy users this weekend. 73 Rick N2AMGHI Rick, that's a surprise to me. Can you summarize where you are seeing differences please? 73 Bill G4WJS.
|
|
|
|
Locked
Re: Separate Copy of WSJT-X on another computer not Shading Wrk B4
Al Groff
Hasan,
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
I think the grey shading comes from JTAlert.. AL, K0VM On 6/25/2020 12:54 PM, Hasan Schiers
N0AN wrote:
|
|
|
|
Locked
Re: Separate Copy of WSJT-X on another computer not Shading Wrk B4
On 25/06/2020 18:54, Hasan Schiers N0AN
wrote:
Hi Hasan, WSJT-X does not colour or shade worked before stations. It will highlight new calls on the current band and/or new calls on any band. Check the "New Call" and "New Call on Band" highting options in "Settings->Colors" to enable that as you wish. 73 |
|
|
|
Locked
Separate Copy of WSJT-X on another computer not Shading Wrk B4
Hasan Schiers N0AN
I have a copy of X running on an SDR with another computer and for some reason the coloring/shading does not work as I expect. The CQs are showing in Green, but no worked B4 gray shading is happening. I have checked the box in General > Show DXCC , Worked Status....and the default coloring has been checked. I copied my main wsjt-x adi log from my other machine, and told the SDR copy with X to Rescan the adif log, which it does and shows 1428 worked b4 records created. However, when I actually watch decodes on both machines, the main machine shows worked b4 as expected while the SDR machine with the exact sme decode does not show ANY worked B4. What am I doing wrong? 73, N0AN Hasan |
|
|
|
Locked
Re: wsjt-x and propagation mode in logs
Hi Bill,
a universal diff against the master branch HEAD of the git repo onAh great. I did look for the sources on github but couldn't find. I always forget about Sourceforge because it's rather slow and looks almost dead Will try my best to create a PR there. vy73 de Florian DF2ET |
|
|
|
Locked
Re: v2.2.1 Hamlib errors with FT-891
On 25/06/2020 18:26, SM0TGU via groups.io wrote:
Same problem for RS-918 (mcHF) radio that are using FT-817 protocol. RS-918 seams not to work with FT-857 as selected radio.Hi Lars, the Hamlib FT-817 back-end has extra retries to help it work with non-conforming CAT emulations. The usual issue is that the rig will not respond to CAT commands until the bootloader has timed out. It is worth trying a few times with the FT-857 rig model, you may find it does work if it can get passed the initial CAT exchange. 73 Bill G4WJS. |
|
|
|
Locked
Re: v2.2.1 Hamlib errors with FT-891
Same problem for RS-918 (mcHF) radio that are using FT-817 protocol. RS-918 seams not to work with FT-857 as selected radio.
Reverting back to v2.2.0 and it is working perfect with FT-817. /Lars SM0TGU |
|
|
|
Locked
Re: Uh OH! Serious bug for Field Day!
On Wed, 24 Jun 2020 22:23:22 -0700
"K7RA Tad Cook" <k7ra@...> wrote: "But, but!" I've been told, this is a practice for emergencies, not aThat is interesting. It never occurred to me to look at it that way because TPTB always trotted out the logging software and the ops dutifully logged. But FD has devolved into pretty much just another contest whether or not the ARRL will admit to it. You wouldn't be using stuff like CAT control or FT- modes in a real emergency either. FD has jumped the shark as an emergency comms drill. ISTM that the POTA/SOTA/WWFF/IOTA/etc. crowd has done much more to advance the state of fly be the seat of your pants portable communications in recent years. Those guys are probably better able to set up and start passing traffic quickly in a disaster zone than the 22A FD club. No matter, I "retired" from FD anyway... :D 73 -Jim NU0C |
|
|
|
Locked
Re: #bug #macos #hamlib #wsjtx #thank
#IssueReport
On 25/06/2020 17:11, Miloš Soukup wrote:
Hi Miloš, Glenn's issue was slightly complicated because he is not using a real FT-817D but a UbitX rig that uses an FT-817D protocol. In your case the FT-857 rig option should work OK. 73 Bill G4WJS. |
|
|
|
Locked
Re: wsjt-x and propagation mode in logs
On 25/06/2020 16:35, Florian Wolters wrote:
Dear group,Hi Florian, a universal diff against the master branch HEAD of the git repo on SourceForge is sufficient. https://sourceforge.net/p/wsjt/wsjtx/ci/master/tree/ you can also submit a PR from a fork there if yo wish, but a patch is fine. 73 Bill G4WJS. |
|
|
|
Locked
Re: Any issues with WSJT-X in Linux?
Gwen Patton <ardrhi@...>
Bill, I'll look into that, but I haven't updated the machine in a couple of months. It was intended for digital operations in the field, and the Covid-19 lockdowns in my area made field ops impossible. So my updating my software has lagged behind. What I said was the case when I last used it. As in all things, YMMV. I suspect I'll just continue to use the USB sound dongle because I already have it working. If they HAVE fixed the problem, it will probably wait for me to get around to revising my system at some point. But if it ain't broke, don't fix it. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- 73, Gwen, NG3P On Thu, Jun 25, 2020 at 7:22 AM Bill Somerville <g4wjs@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
Locked
Re: #bug #macos #hamlib #wsjtx #thank
#IssueReport
Miloš Soukup
Hello Bill, I have the same problem with FT-817. I returned to 2.1.2 - it works for me fine. Should I select FT-857 also? tnx & 73 de Miloš, OK1FMY |
|
|
|
Locked
Re: Should I have to enter CLASS and SECTION for every contact when I have Advanced>>Special Operating Activity>>ARRL Field Day selected?
Reino Talarmo
Hi Sam, Perhaps the reason is that the contest message exchange is defined as: ARRL Field Day CQ FD K1ABC FN42 K1ABC W9XYZ 6A WI W9XYZ K1ABC R 2B EMA K1ABC W9XYZ RR73
There is no additional 73 that was ‘forced’ by the RRR. Good Luck in FD! 73, Reino OH3mA
From: main@WSJTX.groups.io [mailto:main@WSJTX.groups.io] On Behalf Of Sam Birnbaum via groups.io
Hi Bill, Yes I did force a ctrl+R. I assume that if I did not I would have sent rr73 instead. As far as the docs indicate only ft4 forces rr73. Why would an era break the fd exchange process?
73,
Sam W2JDB
Sam,
are you forcing a Ctrl+R into WSJT-X? Unfortunately WSJT-X allows that even though is breaks the FD exchange.
73
On 25/06/2020 16:08, Sam Birnbaum via groups.io wrote:
|
|
|
|
Locked
wsjt-x and propagation mode in logs
Dear group,
I just made a small patch so that the log widget has a new drop down box that you can use to also save the propagation mode to the adif log and also populate it in the UDP interface. See screenshot attached. I am not sure if there is interest in this to be included in the sources? I could provide a diff against the 2.2.2 sources. Is there any convenient process to make something like a pull request against the sources? vy73 de Florian DF2ET 
|
|
|
|
Locked
Re: Should I have to enter CLASS and SECTION for every contact when I have Advanced>>Special Operating Activity>>ARRL Field Day selected?
Sam Birnbaum
Hi Bill, Yes I did force a ctrl+R. I assume that if I did not I would have sent rr73 instead. As far as the docs indicate only ft4 forces rr73. Why would an era break the fd exchange process? 73, Sam W2JDB -----Original Message-----
From: Bill Somerville <g4wjs@...> To: main <main@WSJTX.groups.io> Sent: Thu, Jun 25, 2020 11:15 AM Subject: Re: [WSJTX] Should I have to enter CLASS and SECTION for every contact when I have Advanced>>Special Operating Activity>>ARRL Field Day selected? #log_issues Sam,
are you forcing a Ctrl+R into WSJT-X?
Unfortunately WSJT-X allows that even though is breaks the FD
exchange.
73
Bill G4WJS. On 25/06/2020 16:08, Sam Birnbaum via
groups.io wrote:
|
|
|
|
Locked
Re: Should I have to enter CLASS and SECTION for every contact when I have Advanced>>Special Operating Activity>>ARRL Field Day selected?
Bill, Could you please modify in a posting the text of the ALL.TXT segment that I sent you so that it is correct for FD? 73, Dave K7DCJ On Jun 25, 2020, at 8:16 AM, Bill Somerville <g4wjs@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
Locked
Re: Should I have to enter CLASS and SECTION for every contact when I have Advanced>>Special Operating Activity>>ARRL Field Day selected?
Hi Dave,
no, I am saying that a FD QSO in WSJT-X
ends with a station acknowledging they have received the other
station's section, class and acknowledgement of your section and
class. That message is an *RR73* message.
73
Bill G4WJS. On 25/06/2020 16:03, Dave - K7DCJ via
groups.io wrote:
Thanks Bill,
|
|
|
|
Locked
Re: Should I have to enter CLASS and SECTION for every contact when I have Advanced>>Special Operating Activity>>ARRL Field Day selected?
Sam,
are you forcing a Ctrl+R into WSJT-X?
Unfortunately WSJT-X allows that even though is breaks the FD
exchange.
73
Bill G4WJS. On 25/06/2020 16:08, Sam Birnbaum via
groups.io wrote:
|
|
|