CQRLOG - open discusion

Yaesu FT-817ND Operating Mode showing as NONE

Submitted by m0dcm on

Hey There,
I've been running CQRLog for a few months now, but have only just noticed when swithing the operating mode from FM to FMN, that it shows up as none in the window. Is there or have I done something wrong? I use FMN a lot on 2m, as there's a lot of operators nearby.

Cheers in advance for any info.

Dave M0DCM
PC - Acer Aspire One AO751h
OS - Ubuntu 9.10
RIG - Yaesu FT-817ND

Forums: 

CQRLOG failing on Fedora 14

Submitted by W4OTN on

I recently upgraded my laptop from Fedora 13 to Fedora 14. I'm now getting an error when I try to start CQRLOG that says "Cannot load library: /home/user/cqrlog/lib/libfbembed.so2.1.1." Since this was an upgrade, and CQRLOG was previously installed, nothing changed on the install of CQRLOG.

I had to rebuild another computer and when I try to install CQRLOG on that computer, also running Fedora 14, I get the following error:

$ ./cqrlog_install.sh

CQRLOG self extracting installer

./files.tar
./install

Forums: 

CQRLog on Ubuntu 10.10 64 bit

Submitted by N9RG on

I have gone through the installation process. A desktop icon appears, but when I click on it, nothing happens. I have been using Ubuntu for some time, but am not that familiar with command lines, compiling, etc. Anyone willing to email me privately for some hand-holding trying to get this program to work. I have had it installed and working on 32 bit Ubuntu, but am unable to get it to work on 64 bit. Maybe I should just bite the bullet and go back to 32 bit?

Roy KW4G
n9rg@embarqmail.com

Forums: 

new QSO defaults

Submitted by KC2STA on

Hello---
I noticed this weekend in 9.6 that when you set the new qso defaults all works good except RST. No matter what I put in the form that sets defaults, 599 is what shows (sent & received)in the new QSO form. Perhaps I am doing something incorrect? Same problem with earlier versions, so not new to 9.6.

And thanks once again for the fantastic programs!!

Dan kc2stA

Forums: 

LoTW confirmation accuracy?

Submitted by sm6vja on

Hi!

I have a lot of QSOs that are marked as "confirmed by LoTW" in the DXCC-statistics. But many of them can not be found as confirmed in the LoTW ... Some of them are not even LoTW users.

What has gone wrong here?

A part of the log is written in another program, but I never managed it to download LoTW data at all.

It also seems difficult to use the filtering function to get only LoTW-confirmed qsos. If I choose the "LoTW QSL received, L" I get both normal QSL confirmations and LoTW in the list.
May be my native ADIF was corrupt?

Forums: 

DXCC-statistics summary work differently in 0.9.6

Submitted by sm6vja on

Hi!

I got 0.9.3 working as I want on my desktop with the latest DXCC-tables and all that. I installed 0.9.6 on my laptop to have a portable log as well. These two versions of CQRLOG does have different opinions on how many DXCC I have worked per band. The totals are the same.

Here's what I've done:

-I export the desktop ADIF to the laptop 0.9.6.
-I "clean up" the log from unknown DXCC:s by filtering DXCC = !. By doing this

Forums: 

Pages

Subscribe to RSS - CQRLOG - open discusion