Linux (Ubuntu) Support

98 views
Skip to first unread message

Jeff Kephart

unread,
Jun 15, 2010, 2:59:30 PM6/15/10
to FDLog
I was frustrated at the lack of connectivity that I got when trying to
use fdlog in ubuntu.
Alan suggested commenting 127.0.0.1 <hostname> from /etc/hosts and
while that worked, I still considered it a
hack, so I had a friend dig into it and has made a modification that
looks for eth0 then wlan0, last one found is
what it uses when starting up. If interested, say the word and I'll
post it here.

73 de n3glv

(mostly ham voip conference at sip/8...@n3glv.homeunix.com or
6417493858)
www.voipcoop.org voip co-operative.

w1rt

unread,
Jun 19, 2010, 8:51:10 PM6/19/10
to FDLog
I'm looking at trying to use fdlog under linux for fd next weekend ..
got it running without a problem, but I have special needs ;)

I run Userful Desktop Multiplier, basically multi-homed X, which gives
me two independent X server/keyboard/mouse instances hanging off one
machine. I need two instances of fdlog on these x servers to talk to
each other, and the easy way would be to force each instance to a
specific interface (eth0:0, eth0:1) and alias an extra static IP onto
the interface (maybe could also do with ports, that's how I handle it
with roverlog for vhf 'tests). Do I have to hack the python to
accomplish this, or is there config somewhere I haven't noticed?

tnx de w1rt/john

On Jun 15, 2:59 pm, Jeff Kephart <n3glv1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I was frustrated at the lack of connectivity that I got when trying to
> use fdlog in  ubuntu.
> Alan suggested commenting 127.0.0.1 <hostname> from /etc/hosts and
> while that worked, I still considered it a
> hack, so I had a friend dig into it and has made a modification that
> looks for eth0 then wlan0, last one found is
> what it uses when starting up. If interested, say the word and I'll
> post it here.
>
> 73 de n3glv
>
> (mostly ham voip conference at sip/...@n3glv.homeunix.com or
> 6417493858)www.voipcoop.orgvoip co-operative.

Alan Biocca

unread,
Jun 19, 2010, 8:59:36 PM6/19/10
to fd...@googlegroups.com
That would require some python changes. Should not be hard, there is just a few lines of code where it discovers the address and calculates the broadcast address.

-- Alan

Jeff Kephart

unread,
Jun 19, 2010, 10:18:13 PM6/19/10
to fd...@googlegroups.com
I am thinking (have not tested) that what you would want is to define a vlan.
so that the second instance would be on a separate ip.
I think the key thing to remember is that the logger sends it's data via UDP broadcast
packets to the default gateway on port 7373.
All stations listen to that traffic as well and log it.
If my over-tired brain atm is correct, then what you need is this second lan or possibly a pair
of them so they can talk over a common network via separate ip addresses.

I know the bit that was holding us back on ubuntu was having to add a host entry for the
lan. So, if you have the two 'hosts' each with it's own ip defined, that sounds right.
I'll run this past my guru to see what he thinks. 73 and best of luck de n3glv.

kd8kbu

unread,
Jun 21, 2010, 9:41:18 PM6/21/10
to FDLog
I made this mod to the current fdlog so I could use it with Linux and
DHCP without modifying the /etc/hosts every time I get a new address,
this mod also works on MacOS X and should not effect windows systems.
It first tries gethostbyname (reading the hosts file), but since most
linux desktop distros will have the hostname on the loopback, it will
try to open a socket to some predefined internet host (in this case
4.2.2.1) and will make note of the interface/IP used to attempt that
connection. If all else fails, fall back to 127.0.0.1 so you can at
least run it standalone.

(at or around line 3775, replace the python call for gethostbyname
with the following)

hostname = socket.gethostname()
# are we on a Linux system, get the local address the hard way
if os.name == "posix":
try:
my_addr = socket.gethostbyname(socket.gethostname())
except:
my_addr = ''
if not my_addr or my_addr.startswith('127.'):
s = socket.socket(socket.AF_INET, socket.SOCK_DGRAM)
try:
s.connect(('4.2.2.1', 0))
my_addr = s.getsockname()[0]
except:
my_addr = '127.0.0.1'
else:
my_addr = socket.gethostbyname(hostname) # fails on
some systems

hope that helps, it's not perfect and I am not a Python programmer...I
can hobble together bits and pieces from the Internet though :-)

John D'Ausilio

unread,
Jun 28, 2010, 5:18:32 PM6/28/10
to fd...@googlegroups.com
Well, I put off actually trying anything until we arrived on-site :(

We could not figure out a way to make two stations run on one box as
desired. No problem on send side, but on the recv side it appears that
there's no way for two processes to each bind to localhost for
receiving broadcast messages. I should have put virtualbox or vmware
on the machine, that would have resolved the problem .. we ended up
grabbing the windows laptop I use for nav during roves, driving to a
nearby ham's place to grab an older version that was compiles to exe,
and running one windows and one linux. Worked well otherwise.

One suggestion for the wish list .. it sure would be nice if you could
edit the entry in line (e.g. type call, exchange, see error in call,
arrow left to correct) rather than having to backspace/delete and
retype. Also would like to be able to enter the three pieces in any
order, but I can see where that would be an issue with the lookup
stuff.

In any case, it worked out well for us eventually .. thanks for the program!

Alan Biocca

unread,
Jun 29, 2010, 11:44:29 PM6/29/10
to fd...@googlegroups.com
John,

Sorry you weren't able to test ahead of time. That makes things rough.

Inputting out of order is on the list to consider. Lots of requests for that from my own group. Have to give that some thought.

FDLog works best when more than one computer is used. It really improves the safety for the data to have it on more than one machine. At some point I'm planning to upgrade the synchronized database and I'll have to consider the case of multiple copies on one machine, I'm sure we can make that happen with some changes to the code.

Thanks for the suggestions.

-- Alan

Aaron Miller

unread,
Mar 12, 2014, 9:20:25 PM3/12/14
to fd...@googlegroups.com
Ok so the last several years for field day I have networked all the transmitters with n3fjp fdlogger and it works well.

I am considering networking linux machines with fdlog this year, so where are we at with the bugs listed here or should I stick with what I got...

Aaron, Evans City Pennsylvania

william hyatt

unread,
Mar 12, 2014, 9:31:34 PM3/12/14
to fd...@googlegroups.com
We did this a couple of years ago, and it worked wonderfully. Howver, I have not kept up with the progress of FDLOG in that time and do not know if the scoring has kept up with the rules as they have changed.



--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "HS-FDLog" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to fdlog+un...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Alan, W6AKB

unread,
May 28, 2014, 1:08:04 AM5/28/14
to fd...@googlegroups.com
We use FDLog each year. Most of the scoring is supported, but since the entry is now done by web form it is not necessary for the program to have every little feature anyway. FDLog supports the QSO related stuff, which is the part it needs to.

This year I'm working on improving time synchronization, we're going to use both NTP and a USB GPS Clock. It is good to have a couple solutions because Murphy will mess with one of them at least.

-- Alan w6akb



On Wednesday, March 12, 2014 6:31:34 PM UTC-7, AE5CP wrote:
We did this a couple of years ago, and it worked wonderfully. Howver, I have not kept up with the progress of FDLOG in that time and do not know if the scoring has kept up with the rules as they have changed.
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages