Because of higher demands in our project we tend to leave the yun / openwrt boards an make a shift to to stronger chips etc etc.
The uart communication is working flawless, when connecting to the uart pin, al full working console without any strange chars.
But...
When we try with the bridge library, through the uart pins, we see the communication, but the run-bridge is never executed. The arduino lib is wrapping arount ru some extra stuff.
Dont look at the path, it are just guesses of the env var. Completely normal. I will mark the behavior with bold.
stat64("/usr/bin/\371run-bridge", 0xbed7a840) = -1 ENOENT (No such file or directory)
stat64("/sbin/\371run-bridge", 0xbed7a840) = -1 ENOENT (No such file or directory)
stat64("/bin/\371run-bridge", 0xbed7a840) = -1 ENOENT (No such file or directory)
When i do normal serial connection, and pass them throught i dont get anny garbage. The bridge lib is creating garvage in between. I can reproduce it on a due and mega.
Because of higher demands in our project we tend to leave the yun / openwrt boards an make a shift to to stronger chips etc etc.
The uart communication is working flawless, when connecting to the uart pin, al full working console without any strange chars.
But...
When we try with the bridge library, through the uart pins, we see the communication, but the run-bridge is never executed. The arduino lib is wrapping arount ru some extra stuff.
Dont look at the path, it are just guesses of the env var. Completely normal. I will mark the behavior with bold.
stat64("/usr/bin/\371run-bridge", 0xbed7a840) = -1 ENOENT (No such file or directory) stat64("/sbin/\371run-bridge", 0xbed7a840) = -1 ENOENT (No such file or directory) stat64("/bin/\371run-bridge", 0xbed7a840) = -1 ENOENT (No such file or directory)
read(0, "r", 1) = 1 write(2, "\371", 1) = 1 read(0, "u", 1) = 1 write(2, "ru", 2) = 2 read(0, "n", 1) = 1 write(2, "n", 1) = 1 read(0, "b", 1) = 1 write(2, "b", 1) = 1 read(0, "r", 1) = 1 write(2, "r", 1) = 1
Some how the class is moving ru as one. instead of 1 by 1.
It could be that openwrt uses an more simpler term ?
Any idea's or help would be helpfull!