Re: [USRP-users] UHD version mismatch

Hi Gokul - Did you update UHD to the same version on both the host computer running OAI as well as the USRP (via the filesystem on the SDcard)? It looks from the GIT commands like you're trying to use UHD 4.0-beta on this new host & you note UHD 3.15 on the USRP ... which won't work. You have to

[USRP-users] UHD version mismatch

Dear USRP Community, I am working on OAI project, and trying to run enb using USRP n310. My uhd version was 3.15 LTS. But as part of the installation for OAI, I used this command in a different workstation: *git clone git://github.com/EttusResearch/uhd.git

Re: [USRP-users] UHD version that supports older DBSRX on a USRP1.

On 11/16/2020 05:38 PM, Lamar Owen wrote: On 11/16/20 5:26 PM, Marcus D. Leech via USRP-users wrote: On 11/16/2020 03:32 PM, Lamar Owen via USRP-users wrote: [TRACE] [DBSRX] DBSRX: trying ref_clock 400.00 and m_divider 4 [TRACE] [DBSRX] DBSRX R:2 [ERROR] [DBMGR] The daughterboard

Re: [USRP-users] UHD version that supports older DBSRX on a USRP1.

On 11/16/20 5:26 PM, Marcus D. Leech via USRP-users wrote: On 11/16/2020 03:32 PM, Lamar Owen via USRP-users wrote: [TRACE] [DBSRX] DBSRX: trying ref_clock 400.00 and m_divider 4 [TRACE] [DBSRX] DBSRX R:2 [ERROR] [DBMGR] The daughterboard manager encountered a recoverable error in

Re: [USRP-users] UHD version that supports older DBSRX on a USRP1.

On 11/16/2020 03:32 PM, Lamar Owen via USRP-users wrote: [TRACE] [DBSRX] DBSRX: trying ref_clock 400.00 and m_divider 4 [TRACE] [DBSRX] DBSRX R:2 [ERROR] [DBMGR] The daughterboard manager encountered a recoverable error in init. Loading the "unknown" daughterboard implementations to

Re: [USRP-users] UHD version that supports older DBSRX on a USRP1.

On 11/16/2020 03:32 PM, Lamar Owen via USRP-users wrote: On 11/16/20 3:14 PM, Lamar Owen via USRP-users wrote: So, I'm looking at issue report #304 related to the RFX board, and a related text patch file,

Re: [USRP-users] UHD version that supports older DBSRX on a USRP1.

On 11/16/20 3:14 PM, Lamar Owen via USRP-users wrote: So, I'm looking at issue report #304 related to the RFX board, and a related text patch file, https://github.com/EttusResearch/uhd/files/3881213/0001-rfx-Fix-calculation-of-prescaler-and-band-select.patch.txt that seem to have a similar

Re: [USRP-users] UHD version that supports older DBSRX on a USRP1.

On 11/16/20 2:20 PM, Lamar Owen via USRP-users wrote: On 11/16/20 1:12 PM, Marcus D. Leech via USRP-users wrote: On 11/16/2020 10:26 AM, Lamar Owen via USRP-users wrote: ... AssertionError: m and ref_clock/m >= 1e6 and ref_clock/m <= 2.5e6   in double dbsrx::set_lo_freq(double)   at

Re: [USRP-users] UHD version that supports older DBSRX on a USRP1.

On 11/16/20 1:12 PM, Marcus D. Leech via USRP-users wrote: On 11/16/2020 10:26 AM, Lamar Owen via USRP-users wrote: ... AssertionError: m and ref_clock/m >= 1e6 and ref_clock/m <= 2.5e6   in double dbsrx::set_lo_freq(double)   at

Re: [USRP-users] UHD version that supports older DBSRX on a USRP1.

On 11/16/2020 10:26 AM, Lamar Owen via USRP-users wrote: System: CentOS 8 using Anaconda3 with the conda-forge GNURadio 3.8.2 and UHD 3.15.0 loaded. USRP: USRP1 with a DBSRX. Behavior is replicated with the EPEL8 UHD 3.15 packages, run as root. Question: what version of UHD do I need to

[USRP-users] UHD version that supports older DBSRX on a USRP1.

System: CentOS 8 using Anaconda3 with the conda-forge GNURadio 3.8.2 and UHD 3.15.0 loaded. USRP: USRP1 with a DBSRX.  Behavior is replicated with the EPEL8 UHD 3.15 packages, run as root. Question: what version of UHD do I need to downgrade to in order for 'ye olde DBSRX' daughterboard to be

Re: [USRP-users] UHD Version

_ From: Robin Coxe Sent: 28 June 2019 22:57 To: Andrew Thommesen Cc: usrp-users@lists.ettus.com Subject: Re: [USRP-users] UHD Version After cloning the gnuradio repo, you can edit this file: https://github.com/gnuradio/gr-recipes/blob/master/uhd.lwr On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 3:39 PM Andrew Thommesen vi

Re: [USRP-users] UHD Version

After cloning the gnuradio repo, you can edit this file: https://github.com/gnuradio/gr-recipes/blob/master/uhd.lwr On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 3:39 PM Andrew Thommesen via USRP-users < usrp-users@lists.ettus.com> wrote: > Hi, > > When installing rfnoc using pybombs is it possible to specify the

[USRP-users] UHD Version

Hi, When installing rfnoc using pybombs is it possible to specify the version of UHD that you want to install? If so, how? Thanks, Andy ___ USRP-users mailing list USRP-users@lists.ettus.com

Re: [USRP-users] UHD Version >= 3.10 Experimental?

Oh, and here is the relevant code from GitHub: https://github.com/EttusResearch/uhd/blob/release_003_010_001_001/host/cmake/Modules/UHDVersion.cmake#L63 On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 4:46 PM, Dave NotTelling wrote: > Martin, > > I tried the following: > > cd /tmp >

Re: [USRP-users] UHD Version >= 3.10 Experimental?

Martin, I tried the following: cd /tmp git clone https://www.github.com/EttusResearch/uhd cd uhd git checkout release_003_010_001_001 cd host mkdir build cd build cmake .. And I get the same experimental

Re: [USRP-users] UHD Version >= 3.10 Experimental?

Martin, Ron is correct, it's a warning at the end. I hadn't considered the CMake cache. I'll give that another go later. Thank you both! -Dave On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 7:59 PM, Ron Economos via USRP-users < usrp-users@lists.ettus.com> wrote: > It looks like this near the end of cmake.

Re: [USRP-users] UHD Version >= 3.10 Experimental?

It looks like this near the end of cmake. Not an error. -- ## -- # UHD disabled components -- ## --   * GPSD --   * E100 --   * E300 -- --

Re: [USRP-users] UHD Version >= 3.10 Experimental?

On 05/02/2018 11:04 AM, Dave NotTelling via USRP-users wrote: > Are versions >= 3.10 still considered experimental?  I thought that any > version with a release_XXX_XXX_XXX was considered stable.  When I run > cmake ../ on any version 3.10 or higher it warns me that I am on a > development branch.

Re: [USRP-users] UHD version for RFNoC

We've updated rfnoc-devel to track master, and thus, use Vivado 2017.4. -- M On 03/27/2018 12:00 AM, Derek Kozel via USRP-users wrote: > Hello Juan, > > Right now RFNoC development requires Vivado 2015.4 and the rfnoc-devel > branch. We are in the process of updating the rfnoc-devel branch to >

Re: [USRP-users] UHD version for RFNoC

Ok is there any way to build for rfnoc-devel using Vivado 2017.4 then? On Mon, Mar 26, 2018 at 11:22 PM, Marcus D. Leech via USRP-users < usrp-users@lists.ettus.com> wrote: > On 03/26/2018 11:15 PM, Juan Francisco via USRP-users wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> I am starting a new RFNoC design with

[USRP-users] UHD version for RFNoC

Hi, I am starting a new RFNoC design with custom RFNoC FPGA blocks, and I am a bit confused as to whether I should use UHD 3.11 or the rfnoc-devel branch. I'd like to be able to build using Vivado 2017.4, which seems to be the default for 3.11, but the rfnoc-devel branch is still stuck on

Re: [USRP-users] UHD Version for New UBX Hardware Rev

Derek, Thank you very much! -David On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 11:03 AM, Derek Kozel wrote: > Hello Dave, > > This commit added the EEPROM IDs for the updated UBX version. > https://github.com/EttusResearch/uhd/commit/f5a082fd3841571d2a53a9e677b5df > e6d653bd94 > > It

Re: [USRP-users] UHD Version for New UBX Hardware Rev

Hello Dave, This commit added the EEPROM IDs for the updated UBX version. https://github.com/EttusResearch/uhd/commit/f5a082fd3841571d2a53a9e677b5dfe6d653bd94 It was added August 22nd and 3.9.5 has it. I believe there have been a few improvement changes since then which are on the 3.9 branch,