[chirp_devel] Build test results: Failure

[Marco IZ3GME]

I don't like the idea of registing a radio that can lead user to confusion.
Why not to do it quick and dirty waiting for new file format?
We can add a few bytes at the end of image to increase its size and so 
make it different from 7800.

my two cents
73 de IZ3GME Marco

On 01/09/2014 04:23 PM, Dan Smith wrote:
>> wonder if this is the reason why FT7900 model class was never registered.
>> It's really identical to FT7800 in terms of memory layout and size.
>>
>> I guess i'll move that registration for FT7900 and resubmit patch :(
>
> Oh, yeah, I forgot about this.
>
> The radio is so identical, I couldn't find any way to tell them apart.
> We do have people ask how to do the 7900 because it doesn't show up in
> the download list, so registration would be nice, but I just left it
> unregistered until I figured out what to do.
>
> We could register it and hack the test to know that the 7900 is weird.
> The problem with that is that people will download from their 7900 and
> have it report the model correctly. If they save and re-open the file it
> will say 7800. I was trying to avoid that potential confusion.
>
> Maybe we should just nix the 7900 class and modify the 7800 driver to
> say "7800/7900"? I hate doing that, but...
>
> --Dan
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> chirp_devel mailing list
> chirp_devel at intrepid.danplanet.com
> http://intrepid.danplanet.com/mailman/listinfo/chirp_devel
> Developer docs: http://chirp.danplanet.com/projects/chirp/wiki/Developers
>