Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[Bug]: 4.0.2 reports weird 99.99.99 version after flashing #90

Closed
mneuhaus opened this issue Apr 8, 2024 · 6 comments
Closed

[Bug]: 4.0.2 reports weird 99.99.99 version after flashing #90

mneuhaus opened this issue Apr 8, 2024 · 6 comments
Assignees
Labels
bug Something isn't working

Comments

@mneuhaus
Copy link
Contributor

mneuhaus commented Apr 8, 2024

What happened?

When i flash the latest release on to my Nina Chip and try to verify the version number with arduino-fwuploaded i get 99.99.99 back.

Bluepad32 Version

4.0-beta2

Bluepad32 version custom

latest 4.0.2 release

Bluepad32 Platform

Arduino + NINA

Platform version

not relevant

Controller

not relevant

Microcontroller

ESP32

Microcontroller board

Arduino Nano RP2040 Connect

OS

None

Relevant log output

Version 4.0.2 gives weird 99.99.99 Version number:

(base) ➜  bluepad32-nina-v4.0.2 ./arduino-fwuploader firmware flash -b $BOARD -a $ADDRESS -i bluepad32-nina-full.bin
rp2040load 1.0.6 - compiled with go1.16.2
Loading into Flash: [==============================]  100%

Flashing progress: 99%
Upload completed!%                                                                                                                                                                                                     (base) ➜  bluepad32-nina-v4.0.2 ./arduino-fwuploader firmware get-version -b $BOARD -a $ADDRESS                   
rp2040load 1.0.6 - compiled with go1.16.2
Loading into Flash: [==============================]  100%

FIRMWARE-VERSION: 99.99.99
Firmware version installed: 99.99.99%

Version 3.20.3 works though:

(base) ➜  bluepad32-nina-v4.0.2 ./arduino-fwuploader firmware flash -b $BOARD -a $ADDRESS -i bluepad32-nina-full-v3.10.3.bin 
rp2040load 1.0.6 - compiled with go1.16.2
Loading into Flash: [==============================]  100%

Flashing progress: 99%
Upload completed!%                                                                                                                                                                                                     (base) ➜  bluepad32-nina-v4.0.2 ./arduino-fwuploader firmware get-version -b $BOARD -a $ADDRESS                             
rp2040load 1.0.6 - compiled with go1.16.2
Loading into Flash: [==============================]  100%

FIRMWARE-VERSION: Bluepad32 for NINA v3.10.3
Firmware version installed: Bluepad32 for NINA v3.10.3%                                                                                                                                                                (base) ➜  bluepad32-nina-v4.0.2 


### Relevant sketch

_No response_
@mneuhaus mneuhaus added the bug Something isn't working label Apr 8, 2024
@ricardoquesada
Copy link
Owner

what are the values of $BOARD and $ADDRESS ?

@ricardoquesada
Copy link
Owner

also, the logs says that you installed v3.10.3

FIRMWARE-VERSION: Bluepad32 for NINA v3.10.3
Firmware version installed: Bluepad32 for NINA v3.10.3%                   

@mneuhaus
Copy link
Contributor Author

mneuhaus commented Apr 9, 2024

Hey, sorry for the confusion, my Board and Address:

export BOARD=arduino:mbed_nano:nanorp2040connect
export ADDRESS=/dev/tty.usbmodem3132201 

i'm working on a M1 Mac

the "first" part of that log above based on the bluepad32-nina-full.bin file is Version 4.0.2, which completed successfully but gave back that weird 99.99.99. Version.

Then i tried a bluepad32-nina-full-v3.10.3.bin file as a comparison which gave back the proper version number.

i saw yesterday, that you're deprecating the Bluepad32 for NINA-W10 boards branch of chips, could this be related?

@ricardoquesada
Copy link
Owner

mmm... weird. I'll double check it later today/tomorrow

@ricardoquesada
Copy link
Owner

I confirm that I can reproduce it

@ricardoquesada
Copy link
Owner

regression introduced between v4.0-beta1 and v4.0-beta2.

Probably the changes in console/uart triggered this regression

ricardoquesada added a commit that referenced this issue Apr 10, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bug Something isn't working
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants