Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by mtain-mj03.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id C6C3F380000B6; Thu, 1 Nov 2012 17:15:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1TU26P-0002xG-Dj for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Thu, 01 Nov 2012 21:15:01 +0000 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1TU26P-0002x5-0V for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 01 Nov 2012 21:15:01 +0000 Received: from smtp-vbr1.xs4all.nl ([194.109.24.21]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1TU26N-0000eC-99 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 01 Nov 2012 21:14:59 +0000 Received: from [10.0.0.177] (a80-101-33-132.adsl.xs4all.nl [80.101.33.132]) (authenticated bits=0) by smtp-vbr1.xs4all.nl (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id qA1LErPR054397 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Thu, 1 Nov 2012 22:14:58 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from westberg@xs4all.nl) Message-ID: <5092E64C.8060002@xs4all.nl> Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2012 22:14:52 +0100 From: Albert W User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:16.0) Gecko/20121026 Thunderbird/16.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org References: <508D92BE.2040500@broadpark.no> <508ED047.1000504@broadpark.no> <508EEDA9.7070905@princeton.edu> <50901CB0.2040405@princeton.edu> <50917D09.2030908@princeton.edu> <509299E8.7010608@princeton.edu> <5092D947.1000801@princeton.edu> In-Reply-To: <5092D947.1000801@princeton.edu> X-Virus-Scanned: by XS4ALL Virus Scanner X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "relay1.thorcom.net", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: Hello Joe, I still have one problem left (all versions) and thats autoswitch my TX via a COM port. I use vspMgr to create virtual port pairs, in this case COM 11 is WSJT-X and COM 12 the PTT port of my SDR radio. When "Auto is on" in this setting no transmission will take place at all. Only when I choose "None" in stead of a COM port wsjt-x will give the yellow tx sign and the necessary output. Using Windows 7, 64bit. In WSPR, PTT switching works fine with the same virtual port pair 11 and 12 and the same SDR. [...] Content analysis details: (-0.7 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, no trust [194.109.24.21 listed in list.dnswl.org] -0.7 RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain X-Scan-Signature: 1f795a2ee1ecd56682b47ad11969b3d3 Subject: Re: LF: WSJT-X v0.2 r2713 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.63 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: rs_out_1@blacksheep.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No; SAEximRunCond expanded to false x-aol-global-disposition: G x-aol-sid: 3039ac1d7b975092e68335cf X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25 X-AOL-SPF: domain : blacksheep.org SPF : none Hello Joe, I still have one problem left (all versions) and thats autoswitch my TX via a COM port. I use vspMgr to create virtual port pairs, in this case COM 11 is WSJT-X and COM 12 the PTT port of my SDR radio. When "Auto is on" in this setting no transmission will take place at all. Only when I choose "None" in stead of a COM port wsjt-x will give the yellow tx sign and the necessary output. Using Windows 7, 64bit. In WSPR, PTT switching works fine with the same virtual port pair 11 and 12 and the same SDR. I ran some tests to day to check the dynamic decode range in JT9-2 (r2711) and its OK now > 100 dB while in an early version it was only 30 dB. Thanks for all your good work to improve WSJT-X. 73, Albert PA0A