JP1 Remotes

I've just had 2 users complain they still get double-clicking even when I built them a Remote using zero repeat.

Can someone confirm that we have set the correct bit ?

Normal
---------
Code.S3C80=43 8B 01 8B 12 CC 4D 00 08 00 FA 08 B6 00 FA 04 51 C3 3C 11 94 08 B6 20 11 08 03 F6 FF 36 08 04 F0 C0 56 C0 F0 04 04 C0 60 C0 56 C0 F0 06 C0 10 F6 FF 36 8D 01 46 1C 08 C0 C0 10 04 1A FA AF

No Repeat
------------
Code.S3C80=43 8B 01 8B 12 CC 4C 00 08 00 FA 08 B6 00 FA 04 51 C3 3C 11 94 08 B6 20 11 08 03 F6 FF 36 08 04 F0 C0 56 C0 F0 04 04 C0 60 C0 56 C0 F0 06 C0 10 F6 FF 36 8D 01 46 1C 08 C0 C0 10 04 1A FA AF

Hi Alan, I finally got a chance to look at this, my life has been really hectic lately, and when I do get here, I am distracted with all the "pre-black-friday-spamming" that needs to be cleaned up. I wish those pesky spammers would go away instead of wasting their time and my time!

Any way I was going to create an upgrade and then use one of those buttons in a macro to simulate how it behaves in the slingbox. I never got that far, On my machine RemoteMaster thinks that GI cable and GI cable (no repeats), is the same protocol. Same goes for RC5 and RC5 (no repeats).

I'm using RM alpha v.2.03 alpha 23 and my protocols.ini is from October 2014, so I probably downloaded yours from the file area.

If you look on your output page, it says upgrade Protocol not required in red. If it says that, its not going to package it in the bin. I don't know how to fix that, RM is an enigma to me. You might want to see if this works with an earlier RM.

Hi Vicky. My life is definitely not hectic (I love being retired) so if there is anything I can do to help let me know. I already have full moderator status.

Very interesting point about Protocols.ini, I think, through lack of understanding I have just been copying the revised protocol with the flipped bit but leaving the PID as is. Hence it is not forcing the update. So as I see it ALL of the no-repeat protocols should have the PID changed to 01 FF to force the upgrade. I've done that and updated the download.

Make sense ?

All your no repeat entries need a variant name. A VariantName distinguishes it from the built in device. They can all have the same variant, its just not a variant that is not in the RDF



[XMP (Slingbox)(No repeat)]
PID=01 6C
VariantName=JP1Slingbox


[RC-5 (No Repeat)]
PID=00 E8
VariantName=JP1Slingbox

***

On items where you have multiple needs, zero input just alter the Variant Name slightly.
[Nokia32 (one repeat)]

VariantName=JP1Slingbox1

[Nokia32 (one repeat)]
VariantName=JP1Slingbox0

That doesn't correlate with the existing system. We have been using a NEC1 (no repeat) protocol successfully for a few years and that doesn't have a Variant name, just a different PID.

Having said that, your system does work, and forces an update.

So is either/or, or should I always leave the PID alone ?

as we have a very limited number of PIDs available, I would recommend using the variant name instead of a new PID.

Hi Rob, long time no hear Glad you here keeping an eye on us.

I wasn't actually using a new PID, I was just reusing 01 00F. But the variant name is a more elegant method so I will use that instead.

I've updated the download again.

I bring up the list of new posts every so often and randomly select ones that I think might interest me, and the GI protocol caught my eye.