On Thu, Mar 3, 2022 at 11:23 AM <chris@qelectronics.co.uk> wrote:

Hello Aaron,

Thanks for explaining the reason why the FSK binary wasn’t being built. Sure enough, adjusting the Makefile as suggested allowed the FSK executable binary to be built, and as a quick check the command ./FSK filerw ran successfully. The other modes of operation, which use the RF hardware in the Ettus E310, did not run as successfully; for example, a quick attempt to run ./FSK rx resulted in the error: No acceptable implementations found in any libraries for "ocpi.assets.devices.ad9361_adc_sub". I’m guessing this may be due to compatibility issues between the FSK application and openCPI 2.4.0, a component that I haven’t built correctly, or a mistake in my OCPI_LIBRARY_PATH?

It's more than likely a compatibility issue between FSK application and v2.4.0, again, FSK application it's no longer actively supported and your mileage may vary. 
 

I’m already aware that the fsk_modem_app.xml is the preferred (actively supported?) example program, and have already run that successfully. I was investigating the FSK application out of curiosity, given that it’s user guides are included in the release documentation for OpenCPI 2.4.0.

Yes, fsk_modem_app.xml is actively supported. Our documentation needs to be updated to reflect that. 
 

On a related not, when creating a new OpenCPI application, is an *.xml file that is invoked using ‘ocpirun’ the preferred approach, or are C-based executables equally acceptable / recommended?

Creating applications that are invoked using `ocpirun` i.e. *.xml are often easier to run and maintain but both are equally acceptable. It largely depends on the application.   
 

Thanks,

Chris Cotton


_______________________________________________
discuss mailing list -- discuss@lists.opencpi.org
To unsubscribe send an email to discuss-leave@lists.opencpi.org