This also affected the IC-7610, but the new file fixed the problem. 73's George - WB5JJJ HoIP - 100105
On Sat, May 13, 2023 at 3:29 AM Tom M0LTE via wsjt-devel < wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net> wrote: > Hey Uwe > > While manual testing could probably never be eliminated in the case of > hamlib, has there been any consideration of creating test harnesses to > remove/reduce the need for manual testing? > > It strikes me that there could be potential to capture test cases from > manual testing with real rigs, then at least there would be regression > tests. Future bug fixes could have test cases added to prevent further > regression, again without requiring physical radios and manual testing. > > Apologies if I am not the first to ask this question. > > Kind regards > Tom M0LTE > > On Sat, 13 May 2023 at 08:11, Uwe, DG2YCB via wsjt-devel < > wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net> wrote: > >> Dear WSJT-X users, >> >> Please allow me to summarize again here on this email reflector a topic >> that is very important to me and to all of us. My original post was on >> https://groups.io/g/wsjtgroup, so maybe it's best if you join the >> discussion there. >> >> Despite great personal commitment of the hamlib developers it has >> unfortunately happened very often that immediately after a new WSJT-X >> release serious problems with one or another hamlib rig driver become >> apparent. If something like this happens over and over again, it shows that >> there is a *systematic* error somewhere. In my opinion this is due to >> the fact that *too few* users try the current development versions of >> hamlib, so that errors are detected *too late*. Keep in mind that hamlib >> drivers often change as they evolve. >> >> So I* would like to ask you all that enough OMs act as hamlib bata >> tester in the future.* For those who own one of the rigs below and work >> on Windows, just do the following every 2, 3 or 4 weeks: >> >> 1. Download the daily updated libhamlib-4.dll file available on >> https://n0nb.users.sourceforge.net/dll64/libhamlib-4.dll. >> 2. Copy the file to the bin folder of your WSJT-X installation (i.e. >> usually c:\WSJT\wsjtx\bin). Rename the existing libhamlib-4.dll file >> beforehand so you can use it again later. >> 3. Start WSJT-X (or the respective variant), connect your rig via >> hamlib (i.e. *not* via OmniRig, HRD, DXLabSuite, etc.) and check if >> the CAT control runs properly. >> 4. If anything is not working properly, please contact Mike W9MDB via >> direct email, so he or his team can fix the bug in time. >> 5. If everything works fine, keep the new libhamlib-4.dll file, >> otherwise delete it and rename the previously used one. >> 6. In the future I would like to contact you before a new WSJT-X or >> wsjt-x_improved release to be able to choose a bug free hamlib version. >> >> In my opinion, at least the following rigs need to be tested regularly >> regarding hamlib: >> >> - Yaesu: FT-991, FT-101, FT-847 >> - Kenwood: which models? >> - Icom: IC-7300, IC-9100, IC-9700, IC-705 >> - Elecraft: KX3, what else? >> - FlexRadio: which models? >> - Anything else? >> >> *Now, the most important thing is that **one of you* * organizes it*. I >> can't do it myself because of time constraints, and Mike W9MDB is also >> overloaded with work. >> >> For example, what about the people who have stood out so intensively in >> the last few days with posts about something trivial? Wouldn't one of you >> like to take over and invest your energy there? *Seriously: Who?* *Y* >> *ou are now requested! * >> I mean, what needs to be done is evident: >> >> 1. Create a list of commonly used rig models. >> 2. Find beta testers for each of these models and assign >> responsibilities. >> 3. Get an overview of the status quo and summarize the results >> clearly. >> >> Something like this can be done e.g. with a simple Excel file: >> >> >> >> >> It's sad enough that obviously, the hamlib development team can't do >> something so essential themselves. But *this definitely has to come now*, >> because we can't get the next frustration after every new WSJT-X release. >> Makes no sense! >> >> So, again: >> >> *Who of you will take this in hand and organize such a systematic beta >> testing? *I do not want to see one more "stupid" post as long as this >> problem is not solved, hi, hi! >> >> 73 de Uwe, DG2YCB >> _______________________________________________ >> wsjt-devel mailing list >> wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel >> > _______________________________________________ > wsjt-devel mailing list > wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel >
_______________________________________________ wsjt-devel mailing list wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
