View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
ncoig
Joined: 03 Oct 2004 Posts: 145
|
Posted: Sun Aug 09, 2015 2:03 am Post subject: RDF for Cox 7820 Remote JP1.1 |
|
|
Leave it to me to find this kind of stuff -- I guess no one else uses these remotes here on the forum for much -- but there is an error in the RDF for the 1.1 version of this remote. I'm about to delve into the 1.3 version, but I don't think they are they same so the error is not likely duplicated there.
Essentially, the Fav and Last buttons are oddly interchanged with the Ch- and Ch+ buttons. I have made the corrections in the RDF and uploaded it here:
http://www.hifi-remote.com/forums/dload.php?action=file&file_id=13487
I don't know what section this would most properly be in, Forum- or file-wise, so I just guessed.
Thanks,
-N |
|
Back to top |
|
|
3FG Expert
Joined: 19 May 2009 Posts: 3367
|
Posted: Sun Aug 09, 2015 8:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Thanks.
Would you mind checking if Code: | "channel up":Ch+=$22
"channel down":Ch-=$1A | is the correct order for up versus down? Based on the button maps, I would have expected that Ch+ would be $1A and Ch- would be $22.
BTW, in spite of the marking on the remote, this is a JP1.2 remote using a HCS08 processor. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
ncoig
Joined: 03 Oct 2004 Posts: 145
|
Posted: Sun Aug 09, 2015 10:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
3FG wrote: | Thanks.
Would you mind checking if Code: | "channel up":Ch+=$22
"channel down":Ch-=$1A | is the correct order for up versus down? Based on the button maps, I would have expected that Ch+ would be $1A and Ch- would be $22.
BTW, in spite of the marking on the remote, this is a JP1.2 remote using a HCS08 processor. |
If by checking, you mean that I have a working remote with this RDF in place, then no, I wouldn't mind checking.
-N |
|
Back to top |
|
|
3FG Expert
Joined: 19 May 2009 Posts: 3367
|
Posted: Sun Aug 09, 2015 11:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
By check I mean 1) Manually assign a macro or keymove to the Ch+ key-- use the 995 or 994 commands-- don't do this with RMIR. 2) Make a Raw Download from the remote and post it.
Why do this? Because it is quite easy to make an upgrade which works even though the +/- actions are reversed. But adding subsequent upgrades may not work right. The reason I suspect your RDF has the Ch+ and Ch- button numbers reversed is that the order in the button maps is always Ch+ followed by Ch-. That's true , I think, for every other remote made by UEI. I've been able to confirm that the order shown in the button maps are correct. Of course, there's always the first time, but I'd like to check. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
ncoig
Joined: 03 Oct 2004 Posts: 145
|
Posted: Mon Aug 10, 2015 8:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
3FG wrote: | By check I mean 1) Manually assign a macro or keymove to the Ch+ key-- use the 995 or 994 commands-- don't do this with RMIR. 2) Make a Raw Download from the remote and post it.
Why do this? Because it is quite easy to make an upgrade which works even though the +/- actions are reversed. But adding subsequent upgrades may not work right. The reason I suspect your RDF has the Ch+ and Ch- button numbers reversed is that the order in the button maps is always Ch+ followed by Ch-. That's true , I think, for every other remote made by UEI. I've been able to confirm that the order shown in the button maps are correct. Of course, there's always the first time, but I'd like to check. |
Well, as has been my issue all along, you can't do keymoves, so I presume any 994 command is out. I'll give the macro assignment a whirl - this remote is finicky, though, I know I can't assign a macro to PWR, so we'll see if it will take it on CH+ or -.
I'll report back.
-N |
|
Back to top |
|
|
ncoig
Joined: 03 Oct 2004 Posts: 145
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
3FG Expert
Joined: 19 May 2009 Posts: 3367
|
Posted: Tue Aug 11, 2015 10:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
Yes, I think that shows that Ch+ is $1A.
So why does your remote work? One way this can happen--but presumably not in this case--is with a learning remote. The user learns the Ch+ IR signal to the Ch+ physical button, and upon reading the remote with RMIR, it shows that learned IR signal (let's say it is OBC 23) as being learned to the Ch- button--because the RDF has the wrong button number. Now the user incorrectly believes that the Ch- OBC is 23, but the remote works just fine. It still work after the user converts the learned signal to an upgrade.
Another way is the user (for example, me a couple of years ago) gets an upgrade from here, finds that the Ch+/Ch- commands are reversed, edits the upgrade to get a working remote, and then forgets that an edit was done.
I'm pretty sure there are still other scenarios that provide a working remote. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
ncoig
Joined: 03 Oct 2004 Posts: 145
|
Posted: Tue Aug 11, 2015 12:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
3FG wrote: | Yes, I think that shows that Ch+ is $1A.
So why does your remote work? One way this can happen--but presumably not in this case--is with a learning remote. The user learns the Ch+ IR signal to the Ch+ physical button, and upon reading the remote with RMIR, it shows that learned IR signal (let's say it is OBC 23) as being learned to the Ch- button--because the RDF has the wrong button number. Now the user incorrectly believes that the Ch- OBC is 23, but the remote works just fine. It still work after the user converts the learned signal to an upgrade.
Another way is the user (for example, me a couple of years ago) gets an upgrade from here, finds that the Ch+/Ch- commands are reversed, edits the upgrade to get a working remote, and then forgets that an edit was done.
I'm pretty sure there are still other scenarios that provide a working remote. |
Well, that's what I am trying to figure out. I edited the RDF to correct the CH/FAV CH/LAST confusion, and it worked. But I suspect if you edit the RDF to reflect a different button map, future upgrades will find those two CH keys wrong yet again?
-N |
|
Back to top |
|
|
3FG Expert
Joined: 19 May 2009 Posts: 3367
|
Posted: Wed Aug 12, 2015 11:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The RDF file informs RMIR which button number corresponds to a physical button, and we want to make sure that the RDF lists the correspondence correctly. The macro method you used is a good way, and quick. Another way is to check with a learning remote or Widget that the OBC assigned to a button in an upgrade is actually sent when the button is pressed. (We need to make sure that nothing else has been assigned to the button with a higher priority, like a keymove or learned signal for remotes with such capability.) By comparison, if an upgrade satisfactorily controls a component, that's only a weak indicator unless the IR commands are known with complete surety.
You've already done the macro method. If you still worried about whether $1A is the button number of the Vol+ button, use one of your learning remotes to check if the expected OBC is being transmitted. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
ncoig
Joined: 03 Oct 2004 Posts: 145
|
Posted: Fri Aug 14, 2015 10:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
3FG wrote: |
You've already done the macro method. If you still worried about whether $1A is the button number of the Vol+ button, use one of your learning remotes to check if the expected OBC is being transmitted. |
I'm not worried about the keys' assignment, but rather updating RMIR in the future and having the distro RDF cause my remote's keys to be flipped without warning, which is what I'm assuming will happen, but again, I fail to see how if I have the keys inverted in the RDF now, and thus assigned to the wrong keys, how the remote is functioning as I want it to...
-N |
|
Back to top |
|
|
3FG Expert
Joined: 19 May 2009 Posts: 3367
|
Posted: Sun Aug 16, 2015 12:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Would you be willing to post the RMIR file for your 7820 that is working? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
ncoig
Joined: 03 Oct 2004 Posts: 145
|
Posted: Sun Sep 06, 2015 5:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
3FG wrote: | Would you be willing to post the RMIR file for your 7820 that is working? |
I would, but have discovered I was mistaken. The buttons do not work as I had thought, but I don't know why - I swear they were working before. So odd.
-N |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|