discuss-gnuradio
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: [Discuss-gnuradio] 3.7.9git - QT GUI Frequency, Time, Waterfall - br


From: Tom McDermott
Subject: Re: [Discuss-gnuradio] 3.7.9git - QT GUI Frequency, Time, Waterfall - break with multiple inputs
Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2015 16:50:24 -0800

Very quick response, Tom.   Confirm that this fixes the issue.

Thanks for all the effort you and your team put into gnuradio. It's been invaluable
in an ionospheric echosounding project.  From creating a simulator to test algorithms,
creating the test bench, capturing data, to post-processing the information.

I had a opportunity to present the results at the recent 2015 DCC:
http://www.tapr.org/~n5eg/index_files/Measuring-the-Ionosphere-paper-DCC%202015.pdf

-- Tom, N5EG



On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 7:57 AM, Tom Rondeau <address@hidden> wrote:
On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 7:20 PM, Tom McDermott <address@hidden> wrote:
Created Issue #852

-- Tom N5EG


Thanks, Tom. Just merged in a fix for this bug.

Tom


 
On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 4:11 PM, Tom Rondeau <address@hidden> wrote:
On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 6:37 PM, Tom McDermott <address@hidden> wrote:

Just updated master from git (Oct 30, 2015), 3.7.9git-261-gf8a84eb4
Three of the QT GUIs now appear broken with more than one input.
With one input they seem to work fine.

Seleting 2 or more inputs does not display multiple inputs, just one input,
and the GRC compiler gives an python runtime error message:
    RuntimeError: check topology failed on freq_sink_c(1) using ninputs=1, noutputs=0

All three seem to have the same error behavior, so possibly something
common to them  might have changed.

Anyone else encounter this issue?

-- Tom, N5EG

Thanks for the report, Tom. Can you open an issue on our gnuradio.org Issue Tracker to remind me to get to this later. It has something to do with the new message passing support we just merged in, but I can't think of what might be the problem off the top of my head. I must have gotten some setup logic wrong because the actual work operations are completely separate.

Tom
 




reply via email to

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