PDA

View Full Version : Transporter went dead with monday night's build



pnielsen
2008-04-29, 17:40
My transporter no longer ouputs any sound, and the VU meters don't move. This happened after upgrading the software to the latest nightly build.

How can I make my Tranporter work again? (The receiver and SB work fine).

Thanks,
Peter

andyg
2008-04-29, 17:50
Try resetting the Xilinx by holding down the 1 key on your remote while plugging in the power.

pnielsen
2008-04-29, 17:56
Got a "Programming Xilinx..." message, so it appears to have refreshed Xilinx. Unfortunately that did NOT help... :(

Strange enough, everything appears to work when looking in Squeececenter. The only things not working is the VU meter and the fact that there is no sound output... Weird!

Peter

pnielsen
2008-04-29, 18:20
Downgraded from nightly 7.1 to 7.01 and did the xilinx thing again. This time it worked, and the problem is solved. Thanks!!!

Peter

JJZolx
2008-04-29, 18:38
Firmware 40 strikes again. It's a shame that no one at SD has time any more to fix the software problems with Transporter.

gharris999
2008-04-29, 20:49
I'm using fm 40 and, aside from the excessive knob degaussing, it's working fine. I did have to program the xilinx, though.

max.spicer
2008-04-30, 02:09
I'm using fm 40 and, aside from the excessive knob degaussing, it's working fine. I did have to program the xilinx, though.

It's been pretty terrible for me. I frequently have to resort to xilinx reprogramming in order to get my transporter to produce sound and/or in order to get the knob working again.

Actually, enough is enough - can I force it to not use fw40? I need to run the 7.1+ branches in order to test and develop and am normally happy to take the rough with the smooth, but I'm fed up of not being able to rely on my transporter!

Max

radish
2008-04-30, 06:11
You can edit the transporter.version file to tell it which fw to use, then just find the right .bin and put it in the firmware dir.

Robin Bowes
2008-04-30, 09:43
JJZolx wrote:
> Firmware 40 strikes again. It's a shame that no one at SD has time any
> more to fix the software problems with Transporter.

Jim,

Please engage your brain before typing.

fw40 was an early release for testing, ie. to find problems. Well fancy
that - problems were found, so it won't be officially released. Ever
notice that Squeezebox firmware releases aren't always consecutive?
That's because some versions are not officially released. Transporter
firmware development is continuing and a new version will be released in
due course.

Wwould you care to tell us on what basis you arrived at the conclusion
expressed in your statement above?

R.

JJZolx
2008-04-30, 10:50
JJZolx wrote:
> Firmware 40 strikes again. It's a shame that no one at SD has time any
> more to fix the software problems with Transporter.

Wwould you care to tell us on what basis you arrived at the conclusion
expressed in your statement above?

Firmware 40 came out a full three months ago, with immediate reports of problems, but there's been no follow up beta firmware to date. Apparently Sean is doing the firmware, but he's stated that he's busy with other things.

http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=45030#post285343

ModelCitizen
2008-04-30, 11:34
I'm a bit stuck with this 7.1/Transporter firmware 40 thing too. I'd like to try 7.1 but firmware 40 turns my Transporter into a mute.

I guess I could try editing the transporter.version file... but I just can't be fussed.

I, like Sean, have other things to do.

MC

mherger
2008-04-30, 12:11
> I guess I could try editing the transporter.version file... but I just
> can't be fussed.

It's worth the minute it takes. Just replace the three instances of 40 with 37. Restart. Done.

--

Michael

max.spicer
2008-04-30, 15:01
> I guess I could try editing the transporter.version file... but I just
> can't be fussed.

It's worth the minute it takes. Just replace the three instances of 40 with 37. Restart. Done.

Agreed, but I think the question of why FW40 is still in 7.1 is valid. It's never going to be released, so why not pull it now until its replacement is ready for testing. It's certainly a barrier to people testing 7.1 properly and generates a large volume of posts from confused people. I now that a few find FW40 useful, but they definitely appear to be in the majority. Wouldn't it be better to leave both .bins in the repository, but to default transporter.version to 37 rather than 40?

Max

andyg
2008-04-30, 15:55
On Apr 30, 2008, at 6:01 PM, max.spicer wrote:
>
> mherger;297373 Wrote:
>>> I guess I could try editing the transporter.version file... but I
>> just
>>> can't be fussed.
>>
>> It's worth the minute it takes. Just replace the three instances of
>> 40
>> with 37. Restart. Done.
>
> Agreed, but I think the question of why FW40 is still in 7.1 is valid.
> It's never going to be released, so why not pull it now until its
> replacement is ready for testing. It's certainly a barrier to people
> testing 7.1 properly and generates a large volume of posts from
> confused people. I now that a few find FW40 useful, but they
> definitely appear to be in the majority. Wouldn't it be better to
> leave both .bins in the repository, but to default transporter.version
> to 37 rather than 40?

Because some people wanted to use the features in 40.

Perhaps these people need to be the ones who have to go to the extra
effort of changing the version file. Maybe I'll start a poll. :)

andyg
2008-04-30, 16:06
On Apr 30, 2008, at 6:55 PM, Andy Grundman wrote:
>
> On Apr 30, 2008, at 6:01 PM, max.spicer wrote:
>>
>> mherger;297373 Wrote:
>>>> I guess I could try editing the transporter.version file... but I
>>> just
>>>> can't be fussed.
>>>
>>> It's worth the minute it takes. Just replace the three instances of
>>> 40
>>> with 37. Restart. Done.
>>
>> Agreed, but I think the question of why FW40 is still in 7.1 is
>> valid.
>> It's never going to be released, so why not pull it now until its
>> replacement is ready for testing. It's certainly a barrier to people
>> testing 7.1 properly and generates a large volume of posts from
>> confused people. I now that a few find FW40 useful, but they
>> definitely appear to be in the majority. Wouldn't it be better to
>> leave both .bins in the repository, but to default
>> transporter.version
>> to 37 rather than 40?
>
> Because some people wanted to use the features in 40.
>
> Perhaps these people need to be the ones who have to go to the extra
> effort of changing the version file. Maybe I'll start a poll. :)

Please vote here: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=47055

ModelCitizen
2008-05-01, 00:14
Another barrier to testing for me 7.1 is the plugins issue. It says somewhere that not all current plugins will work with it. If the ones I find crucial do not work then I can't install it, but so far I can find no indication of which ones will work and which ones won't.

The deal-breakers for me are:

Alien BBC
Last.fm
Lazy Search
...and to a lesser extent:
Biography
Album Info

MC

chinablues
2008-05-01, 01:31
Michael...what program would I use to open/edit the transporter_40.bin file?

dan

mherger
2008-05-01, 01:38
> Michael...what program would I use to open/edit the transporter_40.bin
> file?

Don't open the .bin file. It's the transporter.verison you need to edit. wordpad will do (just be sure you store the file as text only), notepad very likely wouldn't.

--

Michael

bpa
2008-05-01, 01:39
Another barrier to testing for me 7.1 is the plugins issue.


For AlienBBC and many plugins - just change the Maxversion in install.xml to "*" rather than 7.0+

However 7.1 is still in development - I don't think it is officially beta so I would not expect many plugin releases specially for current 7.1. For example recently part of the Plugin API in settings changed requiring a prefix "pref_" - although backward compatibility is implemented , the user will get warning messages with current plugins.

max.spicer
2008-05-01, 04:08
Agreed, but I think the question of why FW40 is still in 7.1 is valid. It's never going to be released, so why not pull it now until its replacement is ready for testing. It's certainly a barrier to people testing 7.1 properly and generates a large volume of posts from confused people. I now that a few find FW40 useful, but they definitely appear to be in the majority. Wouldn't it be better to leave both .bins in the repository, but to default transporter.version to 37 rather than 40?

Max

Damn, I meant minority, not majority! That last bit should have read: "I know that a few find FW40 useful, but they definitely appear to be in the minority. Wouldn't it be better to leave both .bins in the repository, but to default transporter.version to 37 rather than 40?"

Max

gharris999
2008-05-01, 06:30
I could live with that. Because I'm switching back and forth between 7.1 and 7.0.1, I've been copying the .version and .bin files from 7.1 to the 7.0.1 dir after every update. But I'm not really using any of the 40 specific features (dsp, etc.). I'll switch around to use 37 in both cases and see how that goes.