Closed chepo92 closed 5 years ago
Why have you restored:
"AUTOREPORT_TEMP: " + stringify(fwAutoreportTempCap);
if (fwAutoreportTempCap)
message += " Enabled: " + stringify(autoreportTempEnabled);
message += "\n"
when cap is not available "enabled" should have nosense..or not?
Why have you restored:
"AUTOREPORT_TEMP: " + stringify(fwAutoreportTempCap); if (fwAutoreportTempCap) message += " Enabled: " + stringify(autoreportTempEnabled); message += "\n"
when cap is not available "enabled" should have nosense..or not?
Yeah you're right, i think i failed when syncing my repo with the great merge
Do we still need the telnetSend("< New line but nothing to do with it");
?
With 99c46b2 still getting
< #TIMEOUT#
> M105
< #TIMEOUT#
> M105
< #TIMEOUT#
> M105
< #TIMEOUT#
> M105
< #TIMEOUT#
> M105
< #TIMEOUT#
> M105
< #TIMEOUT#
> M105
< #TIMEOUT#
> M105
< #TIMEOUT#
> M105
Do we still need the
telnetSend("< New line but nothing to do with it");
?
I think yes, to differentiate from correctly received responses (eg you receive an ok then a non parsed then an ok, you will think 3 lines where correct), also and to be more verbose and clear, we'are still hunting bugs (telnet is not for the end user but debuggers)!
With 99c46b2 still getting
< #TIMEOUT# > M105 < #TIMEOUT# > M105 < #TIMEOUT# > M105 < #TIMEOUT# > M105 < #TIMEOUT# > M105 < #TIMEOUT# > M105 < #TIMEOUT# > M105 < #TIMEOUT# > M105 < #TIMEOUT# > M105
What does your firm reply if you send an M105 over serial?, it is not understanding it but also not replying to it (at least with an "unknown command") so I think it is stalling with something else that your gcode has that makes it busy (and it does not have echo:busy but stay in silence) (maybe a homing? heating?)
Upvote to merge this? @GMagician @probonopd
Let's use >
for what we are sending to the printer and <
for what is coming from the printer. All other lines should not have these characters. Let's not mix our comments with stuff going to or coming from the printer in one line.
Solves #76