Re: [Xlog-discussion] a curious observation

[Joop Stakenborg]

Eric S. Johansson wrote:
> I finally got a copy, built-in etc. got Ham lib settings working right.
>
> thank you for putting into the documentation the notes about rigctrl.  
> it really save me a whole bunch of head scratching.
>
> two things that do puzzle me:
>
> Why not sample the rate faster than 300 milliseconds if the radio is 
> changing?  I knew why it was lagging.  A 300 millisecond sample time is 
> very... very slow.  From a usability perspective, it might be nice if 
> you could increase the sample rate to around 30 milliseconds per sample 
> only while the settings are changing.

Hi Eric, sorry for the late reply. Life has been busy lately and 
development was stalled during my 4 week holiday a while back...

300 milliseconds is dictated by the hamlib backend. When you consider a 
rig communicating at 1200 Baud and transferring lots of data (which some 
 of the icom and kenwood rig commands do) it is not so bad. So I have 
taken the worst case and added 100 milliseconds, to prevent the gui from 
blocking. This means there is still a littlebit of time to update the 
screen. If we would make the timeout shorter, xlog would become 
unresponsive, because the serial port eats away all the interrupts.

> Second, maybe I'm missing something in the configuration but if I change 
> the radio frequency or mode, it doesn't change the settings for the next 
> issue to be logged.  I know I might be missing something because I have 
> not played much with it. I'm still trying to figure out how to make my 
> alsa mixer play nice with the world let alone gmfsk.

Err... , not sure what you mean here. Band/mode change should works 
flawlessly, unless it is not supported by the hamlib backend for your rig.

> ---eric


Regards,
Joop PG4I