Re: X10 and Linux

[Gerald <nothere@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, 11 Dec 2006 04:47:40 +0000, Dave Houston wrote:

> Charles Sullivan <cwsulliv@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>>> But the CM17A cannot send the Ninja and other non-standard RF codes he wants
>>> to send.
>>
>>This is true, but he knows that.  The CM11A/CM17A would just be a stopgap
>>until he's got a working CM15A or CM19A system.  He doesn't have a Ninja
>>yet anyway.
>
> But a $5 transmitter (or one salvaged from a universal remote) on a serial
> port can send any code.

OK, time for me to jump back in. This is one reason roZetta would not be a
good choice for me. No time to get my hands that dirty. And I am not a
coder, at all. A $5 transmitter and all the code frequency
documentation in the world does me no good if I can't write the software
to utilize the two together.

The current CM19A Linux kernel driver allows one to send commands by
echoing "plain english" to the post that the device occupies. "echo +a1 >
/dev/cm19a0" turns on A1. "echo ba1 > /dev/cm19a0" brightens A1 by one
increment.

I'd like a daemon that can read what the CM19A is receiving so I can use
the extended remote codes provided by remotes like the Lola to set up
"special circumstances" without wasting house/unit codes.

I think Heyu or MrHouse may be overkill for my needs. If I can get RF
receive to work I can do everything I need with bash and cron using lock
files to arrange special settings. Eg. Push the "ARTIST" button on a Lola
remote and have the daemon reading the receive values write out a file
called /temp/quiet.x10.lock that would have my door motion sensors turn on
the light when someone came up on the porch but NOT ring the doorbell.

For now, I can do this with the CM11A/CM17A combo by wasting house/unit
codes to set up the special situations assuming there is something that
can read the input from the CM11A and spit out the values to me in a
readable form. Actually, I could do it with my CM19A and CM11A, if the
CM17A can't receive then I may as well use the CM19A that receives but
doesn't give me useful output.

Charles, I hadn't thought about having to send the status request via PLC
from the device wanting the status report. I may have to reevaluate that
requirement as I really only want ONE PLC transmitter injecting signals
onto the line. I got the 572 for that reason. It is installed directly at
my main panel. When I add to my system so that overall wire lengths
increase I can add an XTB to the output of the PSC05. I had thought about
going with a W800RF32 but I wanted to inject the signal AT the main box to
avoid having to track down weak signal problems in both directions to find
the "leak". I know my signal starts at the same strength on both legs at
the "head" of the system.

Dave, I hadn't read your argument against the 572 before I bought it but,
honestly, it wouldn't have changed my mind. It's a rule that the FCC
chooses not to enforce, probably for the same reason that it would have
made no difference to me. That FCC ruling for RECEIVERS is a bit idiotic.
For transmitters it is a definite necessity but any idiot can still buy an
FM transmitter in kit form for under $10 and wreak havoc with nearby
receivers if the ham-handed "hobbyist" scratches the coil during assembly
and detunes it. WGL should probably sell the 572 with the actual receiver
parts in a baggie and just the interface parts that connect/communicate to
the PSC05 assembled to be within the letter of the law, but they;ll take
the bite for that if the FCC gets picky, not me.

When the roZetta is ready I may buy one for the parts box so I'll have it
available when I have time to look into more dedicated control -- or when
someone writes software/drivers to operate its outputs from a PC running
Linux but from what I read it may NEVER be "what I want". I'll have to
read your documentation more thoroughly.

I have extra PCs coming out my ears. I want 100% PC control. When I get
something working the way I want on my Linux desktop play box I'll copy it
all over to a dedicated server and stick it in my rack as a headless unit.
But I always want to be able to make on-the-fly changes without having to
reprogram an EEPROM and also want to be able to write a web front end to
feed controls for remote access. I don't like the X10 cameras so I plan to
buy better 12V or 24V cams and address them with UM506 modules but still
mount them on Ninjas. Or possibly leave them hot all the time and use an
X10 compatible relay board to switch the signal rather than switching
power (have to see how much degradation is introduced by putting a relay
inline with signal first).

Gerald

--
If you need to email me directly use: junkmail sysmatrix
Put the appropriate symbol in there and end it with a fish catcher.