xlog-discussion
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Xlog-discussion] Xlog & ADIF


From: Stephane Fillod
Subject: Re: [Xlog-discussion] Xlog & ADIF
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2002 08:59:42 +0200
User-agent: Mutt/1.4i

Dear James,

On Mon, Sep 16, 2002, James Crawford wrote:
> .xlog dir under /home/james and that worked.  The first dozen contacts were
> messed up for some reason as far as date and time which caused the rest of the
> fields to be off but the rest of the 700+ listing were all formatted 
> correctly.
> I manually fixed the first dozen.

I'd be interested to have a look at the first 50 QSO of your ADIF file
(plus the header).  Would it be possible for you to send it to me? 
If there's a bug, it has better to be fixed :)


>     I will put in what my xterm says on startup for xlog, don't know if you 
> need
> it or not.
> 
> address@hidden james]$ xlog
> 
> Gtk-WARNING **: invalid cast from (NULL) pointer to `GtkLabel'
> 
> Gtk-CRITICAL **: file gtklabel.c: line 334 (gtk_label_get): assertion `label 
> !=
> NULL' failed.
> rig: dlsym(initrigs_radioshack) failed (/usr/lib/libhamlib-1.1.3.so.0: 
> undefined
> symbol: initrigs_radioshack)
> rig: dlsym(initrigs_drake) failed (/usr/lib/libhamlib-1.1.3.so.0: undefined
> symbol: initrigs_drake)
> rig: dlsym(initrigs_lowe) failed (/usr/lib/libhamlib-1.1.3.so.0: undefined
> symbol: initrigs_lowe)
> rig: dlsym(initrigs_racal) failed (/usr/lib/libhamlib-1.1.3.so.0: undefined
> symbol: initrigs_racal)
> rig: dlsym(initrigs_wj) failed (/usr/lib/libhamlib-1.1.3.so.0: undefined 
> symbol:
> initrigs_wj)
> rig: dlsym(initrigs_ek) failed (/usr/lib/libhamlib-1.1.3.so.0: undefined 
> symbol:
> initrigs_ek)
> rig: dlsym(initrigs_skanti) failed (/usr/lib/libhamlib-1.1.3.so.0: undefined
> symbol: initrigs_skanti)

This is no big deal. Hamlib is unable to load these backends because
they do not exist. Of course, they never were developped. I'll try to
clean this up a bit in next release, and not report "error" in that case.
 

73's
Stephane




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]