Subject:
|
Re: IR header how optional
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics.rcx
|
Date:
|
Mon, 3 Feb 2003 14:17:36 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2909 times
|
| |
|
|
> > ... IR command packets like x 10:FE 10:FE
> > PBAliveOrNot work fine without headers ...
> > provided ...
>
> From: "Mark Riley" <markril@hotmail.com>
> Date: Sun, 2 Feb 2003 18:26:45 GMT ...
> the raw byte sequence 0x10 0xEF 0x10 0xEF *does*
> get the RCX to respond
Yes, I misspoke, indeed from a place of incomplete understanding, sorry, thanks
for helping.
I did mean to say x 10:EF 10:EF works fine. Like you, if I try x 10:FE 10:FE,
I see it echoed but then I see no further reply. And yes x 10:FE 10:FE was
what I saw in Kekoa's firmdl3.tar.gz firmdl3/rcx_comm.c rcx_wakeup_tower:
char msg[] = { 0x10, 0xfe, 0x10, 0xfe };
> Subject: Re: IR header - A Detailed Explanation
> Subject: Re: IR header how optional -- And Infrared "Warm Up"
> From: "Dick Swan" <dickswan@sbcglobal.net>
This too is great stuff, many thanks.
Pat LaVarre
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: IR header how optional
|
| (...) see ... (...) require (...) That's very interesting. And, I've managed to get replies to "headerless" packets as you describe, however... (...) with (...) I still don't see any response to 0x10 0xFE 0x10 0xFE. The even bytes (0xFE) are not the (...) (22 years ago, 2-Feb-03, to lugnet.robotics.rcx)
|
7 Messages in This Thread:
 
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
