Wacom's drivers have always been atrociously bad, so I'm currently working on a hack.
The main problem I'm having is with calibration on a tablet PC. And before you say anything: no, just no. I've tried literally dozens of drivers, and of the few that work, none allows calibration of Wintab input. You can calibrate MS Ink, but that does nothing for apps like Photoshop that don't support the Ink API.
Having researched the issue a bit, the way I plan to hack it is by writing a wrapper for wintab32.dll which adjusts data packets as they're sent to applications, enabling calibration and perhaps tweaks to pressure sensitivity and whatever else I feel Wacom should have supported all along.
The calibration function is trivial, as is wrapping wintab32.dll and getting at the data that needs calibrating. As far as I can tell there are about half a dozen functions that request packet data, and I've inserted code in each of them to modify said data.
It works, too, at least if I test it on some wintab sample projects.
Photoshop is different, though. I can confirm that it loads the wrapped DLL, opens a wintab context and uses the API to request packet data, which is then modified en route. But then Photoshop ignores the modifications and somehow gets at the original, uncalibrated data and uses that. I can find nothing in the Wintab documentation to suggest how this is even possible.
I'm pretty stumped. Any thoughts?
Could it be that Photoshop only requests packets from Wintab in order to clear the packet queue, and then does something else to actually read the state of the stylus? And if so, what could that be? Some secret, obscure way of polling the data using WTInfo? A hook into the data stream between Wintab and the underlying driver/serial port?
I'm not very sure, but maybe the input from Ink API is also being written on the canvas. I mean, you are writing using two inputs now, which is WinTab and Ink. Got it?
If only you could ignore the Ink input, then that will show the right result.
P/S: This is only a hunch.
Related
I have an obsolete hardware level/pressure transmitter that communicate with mcu using custom protocol (it appear to be similar to modbus RTU), that hardware comes along with an old commissioning software that works perfectly fine under latest windows, that software contain all communication protocol components that I try to extract and use in something like Arduino to pull data out of transmitter, anyone can help out?
Update - Didn't mentioned above that form of communication here is half-duplex serial communication where master hardware/software query slave transmitter.
Now mentioned to program Arduino mcu to pool data out of transmitter.
What best way of getting readable data out of it?
Again many thanks for all your comments and help!
What you need is called a sniffer. Use that as a keyword and you should be able to find plenty of info here at SO and around the web.
To set the record straight it is actually possible to use Wireshark to sniff on Modbus RTU over serial, see my answer here. If your protocol is similar to Modbus I would start with SerialPCAP.
If you prefer more Windows-friendly solutions you can check these out: 1, 2.
Since Modbus is pretty simple I would say reverse engineering a similar protocol should be, maybe not a piece of cake but just manageable, even if you are not very experienced.
These days when almost everyone is a maker or at least a wannabe, you might want to first take a good look around, maybe somebody else already reverse-engineered that protocol and published it somewhere.
The best tool to analyze a protocol is Wireshark. Run it on the communication link between the Windows machine and the radar. First possibility: the protocol is actually something that Wireshark knows (some trials and errors with the "Decode as" menu may be necessary.) Second possibility, less funny: the protocol is indeed completely proprietary and unknown to Wireshark. At least, Wireshark will make it easier to examine the binary data.
This may not be in the right location, so tell me and I'll move it.
I am a recent EE grad and I was hired to build a system that exists on a SoC with a simple 32-bit processor. The system basically monitors several external devices and performs some DSP on it, and then is supposed to send the results using a WiFi device (in my case I have the ESP8266 using UDP) to an email server for logging/notification.
I have been trying to find a library that I can use, but my uC can only program in C and I have it set up for UDP, and everything is in C++ using some other protocol, or something else completely.
I am great at DSP, decent at SoC's and uC's, but when it come to this email server communication thing I am at a loss.
I have successfully configured everything for the sensors, the datapath, the DSP, and connected the system to my WiFi via UDP, but I have yet to figure out how to send data to any servers.
Could someone help me understand how I should go about this?
I have looked into some simple SMTP commands such as HELO, MAIL, RCPT, DATA, etc. but I cannot understand how I actually should implement them in my code.
When I send out the WiFi data via UDP what type of data do I send and how do I format it? Do I need to send any other kind of flags? How should I expect the response? I also know the data has to be transformed into base 64 which is confusing me further.
I am also not super familiar with UDP to begin with, I have been using libraries that are part of the SoC's default library to connect to my WiFi.
I know these may either seem like obvious or stupid questions but it is were I no longer have any knowledge, and everything I find online doesn't make sense, or doesn't attempt to explain it, just gives a pre-made solution
I have found the RFC2821 but it doesn't get any clearer.
I know that's a lot but any help at all would be a lifesaver!
Since you are asking this question, I'm assuming that you are not booting and running an OS suitable for micro-controllers such as an embedded variant of Linux or such. If you were, you would simply be able to take advantage of possibly built in applications or other existing code.
But you don't mention having written an Ethernet stack, so are you using some other library or operating environment which might have some of the functionality needed for an implementation of SMTP?
If you don't and really do need to write your own SMTP client to run directly on the processor you are using, then you should be able to find plenty of examples of source code for this. A quick google search of How To Write an SMTP client showed a few articles with some example code. One article seems to be an exact hit, but you need to look at it further.
However, I would highly suggest just sitting down with a telnet client and connect to an SMTP server you are allowed to use and try the commands you need to just send a message. If you only need to send text, you don't need to get involved in MIME encoding or anything like that.
This question already has answers here:
Closed 10 years ago.
Possible Duplicate:
How to get PCM data from microphone in C++ (os Windows)?
How can i capture sound from the microphone, and hear it in another computer live?
Thanks.
The simplist way is to use the waveIn functions provided by the Win32 API.
You can read Recording and Playing Sound with the Waveform Audio Interface for an overview, or just dive into the API documentation.
To record, you can use the waveIn functions in win32API.
BUT before you send it, remember that the data got in the byte-buffer through waveIn function is PCM format, and it will easily clog your NETWORK. You must first compress the PCM data into aLaw or uLaw format before tunneling it through WinSOCK Apis. Otherwise, it will surely NOT be a "live" feed, also taking up a lot of bandwidth.
Another easy solution for audio i/o is portaudio. Aside from being portable, it's very easy to use.
To get audio data over the network, as another answer pointed out, you should be aware that your data is huge. However, a good place to start is to try sending raw data. Once you can do that, then you can worry about compressing it -- you need to solve a complex problem one step at a time. Eventually, you'll probably want to use UDP for the raw audio packets.
A good library for sending audio, video, chat and other data is google's libjingle which implements the google talk protocol. It has solved many of the issues with UDP vs TCP, firewalls etc. You may find it a bit hard to work with anyway as it's a lot of code and you'll need to work with XMPP which you may not be familiar with. Also, it's C++, not C. It also requires some server mediation, although you can use google's servers. If that doesn't work for you you can do something home grown but you may find you need to do a fair bit of work to get it all right.
I am sure there are some libraries to help you. Try googling for things like "internet telephony library c" and "voip c library" (even though this is not, in the strictest sense, voip)
I'm working on a streaming audio player for Linux/OS X with a bizarre use case that has convinced me nothing that already exists will work. For the first portion, I just want to receive MP3 data and play it. I'm currently using libmad for decoding and libao for playback. My problem is with libao, and I'm not convinced it's my best option.
In particular, the ao_play function is blocking. It doesn't return until the entire buffer passed to it has been played. This doesn't give enough time to decode blocks between calls to ao_play, so the decoding has to be done either entirely ahead of time, or concurrently. Since this is intended to be streaming, I'm rejecting ahead-of-time decoding offhand. (It's conceivable I could send more than an hour's worth of audio data - I don't want to use that much memory.) This leaves concurrency. But while pthreads is standard across Linux and OS X, many of the surrounding libraries are not. I'm not really convinced I want to go to concurrency - so I'm reconsidering my choice of libao.
For my application, the best model I can think of for audio playback would be getting a file descriptor I could select on to get notified when it's ready for writes, then issue non-blocking writes to. (This is due to the rest of the details of the use case, which imply I really want a select loop anyway.)
Is there a library that works on both Linux and OS X that works this way?
Although it's much hated, PulseAudio basically works exactly like you describe (using the Asynchronous API, not the simple one).
Unless what you want to do involves low-latencies or advanced sound work, in which case you might want to look at the JACK Audio Connection Kit.
PortAudio is your one. It has a simple callback driven API. It is cross-platform and low-latency. It is the best solution if you don't need any fancy features (3D, audio-graphs,...).
TL;DR available at the bottom
I've been trying to figure out a way to get two laptops (both running Ubuntu) to be able to pass basic messages back and forth without the need for them to be connected via a wireless network,either by an AP or ad-hoc. I want to reiterate here that ad-hoc networking is not what I'm looking for, I've seen many similar questions here with that as the answer.
I guess what I'm asking is: how do I achieve this? All I really need is for one computer to be able to send a packet, and then for another to pick it up via a packet sniffer of some kind.
Currently: I have both laptops in monitor mode (via a mon0 interface created from aircrack-ng's airmon-ng)so that they can sniff nearby traffic (with Wireshark, tcpdump,tcpcump.org's sample libpcap code, and opening a raw socket and just printing out all the packets. I tried each just because I thought one could be doing something differently/leaving something out). I also have a very basic program that consists of opening a raw socket to send crafted ethernet frames out to the air, but I can't get my two machines to see the other's packets. The sniffer running on each machine can only see the packets going out of that machine (in addition to nearby beacons/control traffic from wifi in the area).
Some things to note that might be important are:
-the packets I'm sending out appear in Wireshark (only on the sending machine) as malformed 802.11 packets (probably because I'm just filling them with junk data for now). I was under the impression that my other laptop would also see them as malformed packets, but it gets nothing
-the sockets I'm using are from a call to socket(PF_PACKET,SOCK_RAW,ETH_P_ALL). Raw sockets are something I just recently was aware of, so I could be misunderstanding how they work, but my impression is that I can craft a layer 2 packet by hand and ship out straight out to the wire/air.
If you're curious as to why I want to do something like this, it's part curiosity, part research for a project I'm working on. I want to streamline / automate the process of setting up an ad-hoc network, and what I'm trying to do here is for the laptops to do a small exchange to figure out the specifics of the adhoc network they are about to create and then make/join that network automatically, instead of either one person explicitly setting up the network OR having both people pre-decide the name, etc of the network and have both computers constantly trying to connect to that specific one.
I'm more interested if I'm going about this process in the right way rather than if my code works or not, if someone thinks me posting my (very basic, taken from another post on Stack Overflow) raw socket code will help, I can.
Edit: I am more than happy to post a complete set of code with instructions if I can get this working. I couldn't find much helpful info on this topic on the internet, and I'd love to put it up for future people trying to do the same thing.
TL;DR I want to send out a packet from one laptop and pick it up on another via a packent sniffer of some sort. No wifi network or ad-hoc network involved. Something akin to spoofing an AP's beacon frame (or similar) for the purpose of sending small amounts of data.
Edit 2:After some thought, perhaps what I'm looking for is some kind of raw 802.11 use? Having direct control of the wifi radio? Is such a thing possible?
I found out I was able to send packets out through my monitor mode interface as long as I had correct 802.11 with radiotap headers. I think the problem I was originally experiencing (not being able to sniff the packets) was because they were malformed and thus not actually getting sent out.
I was able to accomplish this by adapting the example code found here, courtesy of someone named Evan Jones, except I did not need to use an Atheros based card or Madwifi drivers, everything worked fine with the mon0 interface created with aircrack-ng.
I am certain that Apple Mac do this. Apple call it 'bonjour'. There may well be a proper IETF spec for it. This is an Article on Bonjour this is Wikipedia on an open component of bonjour which might help get you moving.